Military Review

The Ministry of Defense spoke about plans for the supply of T-90M tanks to the troops

45
The Ministry of Defense spoke about plans for the supply of T-90M tanks to the troops

Modernized Tanks T-90M will begin to enter the armed forces in 2020, their purchase is already underway. This was stated by the head of the main armored directorate of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, Major General Sergey Bibik.


In an interview with the Krasnaya Zvezda newspaper, Bibik said that among the tasks for the next year, along with the supply of other armored vehicles, the task is to send the modernized T-90M tanks to the troops.

As part of the state defense order, we plan to supply the troops with modern and modernized equipment: T-90M tanks, BMP-3 infantry fighting vehicles and BTR-82A armored personnel carriers, BMD-4M and BTR-MDM airborne defense vehicles, and Typhoon protected vehicles of the latest generation , Tornado, and Tiger

- he said.

At the end of September this year, the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Ground Forces Oleg Salyukov announced that purchases of the modernized T-90M tanks had already begun, but nothing was said about the start of deliveries. Earlier, representatives of the Ministry of Defense and the military-industrial complex have repeatedly stated that work on upgrading tanks to the T-90M level is already underway and deliveries of the T-90M to the Russian army should begin this year.

The military department at the end of June this year entered into a state contract with UVZ for a major overhaul with the modernization of the T-90A tanks, bringing the T-90M to a view. The corporation said that this modernization will increase the combat capabilities of the tank. At the same time, the UVZ did not name the number of tanks that will undergo major repairs, although earlier plans were announced to upgrade at least 400 T-90 tanks already in the troops to the T-90M level. The first batch of incoming T-90M weapons can be at least a battalion set.

The T-90М tank was developed as part of the Breakthrough-3 development work and is a deep modernization of the T-90 with increased combat and operational characteristics.

In the course of modernization, a new turret module with a 90-mm gun of increased survivability and accuracy was installed on the T-125M. A remote-controlled machine gun installation caliber 12,7-mm is installed on the turret. In addition, the new tank is equipped with a highly automated digital fire control system that provides search, recognition, auto-tracking and hitting targets.

45 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. rocket757
    rocket757 22 November 2019 10: 21 New
    -16
    Nobody will say that our military equipment is inferior to the technology of a hypothetical enemy ... if, for serious, important parameters.
    1. Sky strike fighter
      Sky strike fighter 22 November 2019 10: 38 New
      +8
      What are the important parameters of our military equipment inferior? Do not tell me?
      1. RUSS
        RUSS 22 November 2019 11: 07 New
        -9
        Quote: Sky Strike fighter
        What are the important parameters of our military equipment inferior? Do not tell me?

        For example, armored personnel carriers
        1. rocket757
          rocket757 22 November 2019 11: 25 New
          +6
          Quote: RUSS
          For example, armored personnel carriers

          The question is, which ones and how to compare?
          The old generation was made according to the criteria / characteristics that were relevant at that time and were in no way inferior to the corresponding ones, in time and class, impressive.
          And modern, what to compare with? Give an example for comparison ....
          1. RUSS
            RUSS 22 November 2019 11: 32 New
            -7
            Quote: rocket757
            And modern, what to compare with? Give an example for comparison ....

            BTR-82A
            1. rocket757
              rocket757 22 November 2019 11: 41 New
              +6
              Quote: RUSS
              BTR-82A

              It’s not a new technique, besides it’s a waterfowl ... what will we compare with?
              1. RUSS
                RUSS 22 November 2019 11: 50 New
                -4
                Quote: rocket757
                Quote: RUSS
                BTR-82A

                It’s not a new technique, besides it’s a waterfowl ... what will we compare with?

                How is it not new? And what?
                You can compare it with the Striker at the “bourgeois” and have better armor and landing like neither on the BTR 82 on the sides and on top. Also, the BTR-82 is deprived of “suspended” seats (because of its height), which can increase the chances of a fighter’s survival under blast in the mine.
                1. Private-K
                  Private-K 22 November 2019 12: 09 New
                  +9
                  Stricker completely lacks patency. Already discussed. And besides, the BTR-82A is floating.
                  In Stricker, security is basically no better than the BTR-82A. Already discussed.
                  Stricker has no gun.
                  At the same time, the Stricker costs 5 times more than the BTR-82A.
                  and another criterion: Stricker refused to buy anyone. Although the Americans tried to play a fool. Even Israel refused to take on benefits - their Eitan was decisively muddied.
                  1. IS-80_RVGK2
                    IS-80_RVGK2 22 November 2019 12: 33 New
                    -1
                    Quote: Private-K
                    In Stricker, security is basically no better than the BTR-82A. Already discussed.

                    Has the bath rickety with horseradish?
                    Quote: Private-K
                    BTR-82A floating.

                    Fucking advantage against the rest of the worst performance.
                    Quote: Private-K
                    At the same time, the Stricker costs 5 times more than the BTR-82A.

                    You would not chase pop for cheapness. Women still give birth?
                2. rocket757
                  rocket757 22 November 2019 12: 32 New
                  +4
                  Quote: RUSS
                  You can compare with the Striker at the "bourgeois" and better armor and landing

                  Not waterfowl, it means that it’s NOT then according to its tactics. A unit with bells and whistles, but what is fundamentally better is not obvious ... oh, there are more electronic gadgets in it ... but this is until the electronic warfare system begins to extinguish everything and everywhere.
                  Something like this - aggregates are, in aggregate, the same ...
            2. Private-K
              Private-K 22 November 2019 12: 02 New
              +3
              And with all the backwardness, it has a fundamentally better cross, better weapons and, in general, a fundamentally greater combat potential than the main US Army APC - Streaker. Being 5 times cheaper. Yeah.
      2. rocket757
        rocket757 22 November 2019 11: 14 New
        +2
        NOT THIS WAY.
        I rephrase - can someone say that our technology is inferior to the import one in fundamentally important parameters?
        1. Sky strike fighter
          Sky strike fighter 22 November 2019 11: 20 New
          +5
          Kurganets, Boomerang, T-14, T-15, even T-90M, Tigr-M, Typhoon-K, Typhoon-U are not inferior to Western technology. If you mean the BTR-82A, then these are slightly sham, modernized versions Soviet armored personnel carriers, which naturally will be inferior to Western models.
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 22 November 2019 11: 35 New
            +9
            Quote: Sky Strike fighter
            The BTR-82A, it’s a little shamanized, modernized version of the Soviet BTR, which naturally will be inferior to the Western models in something.

            Trying to compare the technique of different classes is not correct. The point is to compare the waterfowl technique with the heavy land crawling ??? It’s heavy, super equipped, it’s good to ride on the roads, poke a little on the dirt .. but only until the first deep ditch, where it will drown!
          2. RUSS
            RUSS 22 November 2019 11: 35 New
            -6
            Quote: Sky Strike fighter
            Kurganets, Boomerang, T-14, T-15, even T-90M, Tiger-M, Typhoon-K, Typhoon-U

            Kurganets and Boomerang, T-14 there are only samples for parades,
            The tiger is inferior in armor, the same Iveco (Lynx), Typhoon-U is not in the series and did not participate in real trials, Typhoon-K if only.
            1. RUSS
              RUSS 22 November 2019 11: 51 New
              -8
              By the way, "Boomerang" will not go into the series ...
            2. dvina71
              dvina71 22 November 2019 12: 11 New
              +4
              Quote: RUSS
              T-14 there are only samples for parades,

              A contract is being executed for more than 100 (130 emnip) tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and a tow truck, based on the T-14.
              Quote: RUSS
              The tiger is inferior in armor to the same Iveco (Lynx)

              There are different tigers .. which one are you talking about?
              Quote: RUSS
              Typhoon-U was not in the series and did not participate

              This is yours ... Ural cars are mass-produced and put into service .. In the South-East Military District there are about 180 vehicles of various configurations, the Urals - 63095.
              Tests at the MO training ground
          3. Fmax
            Fmax 25 November 2019 23: 09 New
            0
            Only these are all samples and in the near future they will fall into the army in ridiculous quantities. And when we finally put the armature with the old 125 mm cannon, the Germans will roll out either a ready-made solution with a 135 mm gun, or a 144 mm long-range gun will be modified (this is about tanks), and our song about 152 mm has calmed down and is not heard.
        2. bessmertniy
          bessmertniy 22 November 2019 11: 22 New
          +2
          Clear sea, no one can say, because no one understood. request However, we will assume that indeed in the main our technology is not inferior.
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 22 November 2019 11: 37 New
            +4
            An unsuccessfully released phrase, may come back ... even harder!
            In fact, any technique is good when it allows you to effectively cope with the task.
            1. Private-K
              Private-K 22 November 2019 12: 12 New
              +3
              That's it. If there are no fundamentally higher performance characteristics, then the ability to correctly deploy troops is fundamentally superior to everything else.
            2. iConst
              iConst 22 November 2019 12: 49 New
              +4
              Quote: rocket757
              when it allows you to effectively cope with the task.

              I think so too. The name of the armored personnel carrier is a bus to the battlefield. Conveyor, though armed like a war machine. For more serious tasks - BMP.

              I have long read that during the Second World War there were episodes when some commanders sent the Su-76 forward into battle like tanks. And self-propelled guns suffered heavy losses.
              The task is not appropriate for the purpose of the machine.
              1. rocket757
                rocket757 22 November 2019 13: 37 New
                0
                Everything has its place and its own task!
      3. Fmax
        Fmax 25 November 2019 23: 03 New
        0
        Tanks for armor penetration of shells and armor. In some cases, the specific power of the engine. By firing accuracy, ammunition nomenclature (we do not have programmable ammunition in principle).
  2. Gust
    Gust 22 November 2019 10: 27 New
    +3
    Quote: rocket757
    Nobody will say that our military equipment is inferior to the technology of a hypothetical enemy ... if, for serious, important parameters.

    So tell me which ones and how much inferior.
    1. RUSS
      RUSS 22 November 2019 11: 20 New
      -3
      Quote: Rafale
      Quote: rocket757
      Nobody will say that our military equipment is inferior to the technology of a hypothetical enemy ... if, for serious, important parameters.

      So tell me which ones and how much inferior.

      May 13, an article was published on this site How to modernize the BTR-80 read it.
      1. Per se.
        Per se. 22 November 2019 12: 18 New
        0
        By 2004, the BTR-90 was ready, which is certainly better than the BTR-80 / BTR-82, and is not inferior to the same "Stryker", having great potential for the modernization and use of various combat modules (for example, "Bakhcha"). Alas, by 2011, they had abandoned the BTR-90, the Moscow Region, under the leadership of Anatoly Eduardovich, then dreamed of “furniture sets”, a la “platform”. BTR-90 would be relevant for our army now, it’s a pity only for the time lost and the money thrown away for such mastodons as the Boomerang. As for the exit “through the backside”, this is not the main criterion, especially since the dismounting of infantry is not an end in itself, it can be more or less dangerous and safe depending on a variety of conditions.
        1. IS-80_RVGK2
          IS-80_RVGK2 22 November 2019 12: 53 New
          +4
          Quote: Per se.
          Boomerang

          The BTR-90 was 30 years late. And the boomerang is normal. Only guns, unfortunately small-caliber, are not modern to him.
  3. Stas157
    Stas157 22 November 2019 11: 20 New
    +2
    The Ministry of Defense spoke about plans for the supply of T-90M tanks to the troops

    The heading gives the impression of the supply of new equipment to the troops. And from the text:
    with UVZ state contract for overhaul with the modernization of the T-90A tanks with the bringing to view T-90M
    it is clear that this is the capital and modernization of old tanks. Here you go and figure out what is really there. What, how and how much.
    In this case, the UVZ did not name the number of tanks that will undergo major repairs
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. DarkMatter
      DarkMatter 22 November 2019 16: 39 New
      +1
      There, and the purchase of new ones and the modernization of old ones. Therefore, confusion could arise. Here's how it was voiced (though the tanks are delayed, apparently):

      Recall that the first contract for the supply of T-90M tanks (Object 188M) was signed by the Russian Ministry of Defense with the Uralvagonzavod NPP (UVZ) at the previous Army-2017 International Military Technical Forum on August 24, 2017. According to published data, the first contract was concluded for the supply of 30 T-90M tanks in 2018-2019. At the same time, out of 30 T-90M tanks, only ten should be new-built vehicles, and the remaining 20 will be converted in the course of major repairs and modernization from T-90 tanks (apparently, in order to assess the level of costs for the possibility of modernization to the T-90M level of the existing T-90 tank fleet).

      At the Army-2018 International Military Technical Forum on August 21, 2018, the Russian Ministry of Defense signed another contract with UVZ for the supply of a batch of T-90M tanks - according to unofficial information, for 30 units of a new building, with the declared delivery time in 2019.

      As Uralvagonzavod Scientific Industrial Corporation JSC (UVZ, part of the Rostec State Corporation) announced on June 28, 2019, it signed with the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation state contract for overhaul with modernization of the T-90A tank bringing to mind the T-90M in the framework of the International military-technical forum "Army-2019".
      According to unofficial information, the specified contract for the modernization of T-90 tanks in the T-90M version provides for the modernization of approximately 100 units of tanks, and, perhaps, we are talking about the modernization of T-90 tanks of the 1990s, rather than T-90A, as indicated in the message.
  4. Ratmir_Ryazan
    Ratmir_Ryazan 22 November 2019 11: 33 New
    +5
    KAZ needs to be put on tanks and URGENTLY !!!

    The new T-90M without KAZ is just an expensive target.

    Moreover, with protection, not only by perimeter, but the upper hemisphere !!!

    Otherwise, all these armored armada will still burn in the convoys, and not just on the battlefield. They will be burnt in packs and saboteurs with anti-tank systems and anti-tank helicopters and ground anti-tank equipment !!!

    A tank without KAZ is certain death of the crew and the tank, and also meaningless.
    1. Air force
      Air force 22 November 2019 12: 57 New
      0
      Did you find out somewhere that in 2020 the armadas will move to Europe. Why so urgent?
      1. Ratmir_Ryazan
        Ratmir_Ryazan 23 November 2019 13: 47 New
        0
        Did you find out somewhere that in 2020 the armadas will move to Europe. Why so urgent?


        Since the beginning of the 90s, even without Europe, we had where to use tanks and other armored vehicles, and we have already lost hundreds of tanks / infantry fighting vehicles / armored personnel carriers and thousands of soldiers !!!

        How much more blood and losses are needed in technology for KAZ to be put on our tanks ?!
  5. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 22 November 2019 11: 48 New
    +4
    Personally, it seems to me that the fresh T72 should be brought to this form .... uniformity should be. At least the BO is the same and the instruments.
  6. Nastia makarova
    Nastia makarova 22 November 2019 12: 05 New
    +2
    Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
    Otherwise, all these armored armada will still burn in the convoys, and not just on the battlefield. They will be burnt in packs and saboteurs with anti-tank systems and anti-tank helicopters and ground anti-tank equipment !!!

    what movie have seen enough ??? or had a dream?
  7. Dikson
    Dikson 22 November 2019 13: 05 New
    +1
    As a technique, do not upgrade, but in a field without a usual log you will not go far ...)
  8. Gust
    Gust 22 November 2019 13: 09 New
    +2
    Probably in NATO, KAZ has already been installed on every truck, not to mention tanks and armored personnel carriers ..
  9. Gust
    Gust 22 November 2019 13: 13 New
    +1
    In general, emphasis is needed on the T-90M with KAZ. An armature of only 500-600 pieces is enough, but with a gun of 152 mm. T-72 to modernize at a minimum - a new sight, communication and navigation. Then to create reserve tank formations and use mainly as heavy infantry fighting vehicles.
  10. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 22 November 2019 13: 44 New
    +1
    The term "Tower module" is somehow strange, if the module, it means it can be easily replaced with something with other characteristics.
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 22 November 2019 19: 41 New
      0
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      if the module, it means easily replaceable with something with other characteristics.

      Namely, but the truth is meant interchangeability not in the field, but in the factory, when creating new modifications.
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 22 November 2019 20: 06 New
        0
        What modifications can be for which it is necessary to quickly change the tower? And there’s simply nowhere to extort the modernization of the chassis of the 70s. There is certainly hope that specifically this tower can be quickly stuck in the yet not modernized 72s, but weak.
        1. Albert1988
          Albert1988 22 November 2019 23: 06 New
          0
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          What modifications can be for which it is necessary to quickly change the tower?

          Not fast, but easy!
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          And there’s simply nowhere to extort the modernization of the chassis of the 70s.

          There is! For example, there is the option of robotizing this chassis and creating on its basis a full-fledged robot tank.
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          There is certainly hope that specifically this tower can be quickly stuck in the yet not modernized 72s, but weak.

          Yes, in principle, a T-72 can be made from T-90, but the question is, is it economically justified?
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 23 November 2019 05: 39 New
            0
            Well, what other module besides a 125mm turret can be stuck on a mod. 72k? So that it does not look like an owl on the globe? I'm afraid that no. So the "modular line" of one module looks rather strange, and even on an unpromising (it's time to admit it) chassis. So the strangeness of the term "tower module" for this article is obvious.
            Quote: Albert1988
            There is! For example, there is the option of robotizing this chassis and creating on its basis a full-fledged robot tank.
            I don’t think that the T-72 robotization requires obligatory "modularity" of the tower, the point is just to depopulate the obsolete, but quite suitable equipment with minimal costs, that is, with the preservation of "iron".
            1. Albert1988
              Albert1988 23 November 2019 16: 47 New
              0
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              So the strangeness of the term "tower module" for this article is obvious.

              Unfortunately, I am not special in this matter, so I can’t directly say for sure whether this term can be used or not.
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              I don’t think that the T-72 robotization requires obligatory "modularity" of the tower, the point is just to depopulate the obsolete, but quite suitable equipment with minimal costs, that is, with the preservation of "iron".

              Perhaps, while we have nothing specific robotic surroundings of some projections in the pictures on this topic, we will wait and see)))
  11. Fmax
    Fmax 25 November 2019 23: 17 New
    0
    [quote = dvina71] [quote = РУСС] T-14 there are only samples for the parades, [/ quote]
    A contract is being executed for more than 100 (130 emnip) tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and a tow truck, based on the T-14.

    That's it, beware of 500 SEP V3 abrams, hundreds of A7 leopards, Japanese types and more, be afraid of the terrible hundreds of Armats.