Military Review

Russian military "land" the flying T-90 tank

116
Russian military "land" the flying T-90 tank

Since the First World War, tracked combat vehicles from slow, cumbersome, poorly armed freaks turned into a formidable modern weapon. Today Tanks have no less weight than a nuclear club, and are not only a means of aggression, but also military deterrence. This difficult argument is capable of immediately determining the outcome of political, social and economic disagreements in favor of the one who possesses it. According to experts, tanks, despite the development of the latest types of weapons at the beginning of the XXI century, will for a long time be weapons No. 1 of the ground forces of all the leading armies of the world.

RBC found out whose frontier the Russian "flying" T-90С tank protects today and why the Russian Defense Ministry has a weakness for foreign armored vehicles.

Tailed tanks "Renault" - the winners of the First World War

Various designs of armored tracked combat vehicles were proposed by military engineers in Russia and abroad as early as the late 19th century. However, almost all of them remained on paper until the First World War. The creation of tracked vehicles with powerful weapons inspired along with obvious technical prerequisites and military necessity. For active offensive action in the protracted trench warfare 1914-1918gg. on enemy territory, enveloped in kilometers of barbed wire with concrete fortifications and deadly weapons and infantry guns looking out of them, a fundamentally new weapon was required. Such a weapon, allowing you to crack the most serious defense, infuse confusion and fear into the souls of the enemy and put him to flight, and the tanks began. Despite the initial low-speed (total 7-8 km / h) and mainly machine-gun armament, the military quickly appreciated the fighting qualities of this unique machine.

The first tank corps, equipped with the British land armadillos Mark I entered the battle 15 September 1916. on the river Somme. The word tank (tank, reservoir), which is familiar to us, was written on wooden boxes in which the British fighting vehicles secretly delivered the battlefield to the German troops. Subsequently, this name stuck, so began to call all the combat vehicles of this type.

The masterpiece of tank construction during this period was the French light tank of infantry support Renault FT-17, which came off the assembly line of the Louis Renault plant. Such tanks began to enter the French army in March, 1918, and until the end of World War I, the military received 3177 of such vehicles. In the Renault tanks, for the first time, a turret rotated 360 degrees was applied, and the layout, which later became classical: the command and control section was in front, the fighting was in the center of the tank, and the engine compartment was in the back. The tank was armed with either a cannon or a machine gun, which was installed in the tower. French light tanks at that time were unusually fast, they developed a maximum speed of 9,6 km / h. The specific element of the design of the Renault tanks was a removable tail, which allowed them to overcome ditches and trenches, as well as carry loads of cargo or several infantrymen in it.

Tail tank "Renault" was so successful that it was later released under license in the United States, where the Ford Two Man was called, and in Italy under the name Fiat 3000. Thus, for tanks "Renault" World War I became truly victorious. At the same time, tanks appeared in Germany. True, the Germans in this field strongly lagged behind the British and French - in Germany, only three of the 8 tank companies were equipped with German combat vehicles A7V. The Germans promptly eliminated this mistake before the start of the Second World War. At the same time, tanks appeared in the armies of other leading world powers - the USA, Italy, Japan, etc.



Blind from what was ... the French, Americans, British

The first foreign tanks in Russia fought against Soviet power — England and France supplied weapons to White, and domestic-made tracked combat vehicles appeared in Soviet Russia in the 1920s. At that time, there were no own tanks in the USSR - the only tank regiment was equipped exclusively with trophy copies, including the British tanks Mk.V (Big Willie) and Mk.A (Whippet) and the French Renault.

From the latter, the Russian engineers "wrote off" the T-16 tank, or as it was also called the Renault Russian, which was later brought to mind and renamed T-18 (MS-1, small tracking tank). The tracked vehicle weighed around 5,5 T, was protected by 16-mm armor and reached speeds of up to 16 km / h. The tank was armed with a Hotchkiss 37-mm cannon and two 6,5-mm machine guns. The T-18 became the first serial Russian tank and was produced at the Bolshevik plant from 1928. on 1931

Since then, Soviet engineering thought, driven by the needs of the Workers 'and Peasants' Red Army (Red Army) and the tense situation in Europe, has improved the fighting qualities of tanks. At the beginning of the 1930's based on the development of the American designer Walter Christie in the Soviet Union create a lightweight 18-ton tank BT (high-speed tank). The tank on the suspension, armed with a 45-mm cannon and machine gun, proved to be a good idea during the Spanish Civil War. However, his 10-mm reservation could not effectively protect the crew, as the armies of the world's major powers began to be saturated with small-caliber anti-tank artillery. Another Soviet three-turreted tank T-28, created by Soviet designers based on the English A6 Vickers, with powerful weapons (had a 76,2-mm cannon and three 7,62-mm machine guns) and 17-20 mm booking significantly inferior BT in maneuverability and maneuverability.

The Red Army needed a new car that would combine the firepower of the T-28 with the speed and maneuverability of the BT. This tank was the A-32, developed in the design office of the tank building of the Kharkov Locomotive Plant (KhPZ) under the direction of Mikhail Koshkin. The combat vehicle received enhanced booking up to 45 mm and powerful armament: an X-NUMX-caliber F-32 cannon, paired with a 76,2-mm caliber machine gun, a second machine gun from the radio operator and a third anti-aircraft gun on the turret. The maximum speed of the tank on the highway reached 7,62 km / h, and the cruising range of 70 km. According to the results of tests in September 300. at the Kubinka training ground of two A-1939 tanks (wheeled-tracked tank) and A-20 (purely tracked), the military approved the latter, giving it the "name" T-32. In March, 34. The protocol of the State Defense Committee was signed on serial production of T-1940 at Plant No. 34 (KhPZ).

The legendary tank of the Second World War

During the Great Patriotic War (WWII), the test of fire clearly demonstrated the highest combat qualities of the T-34 tank, which became the "great-grandfather" of modern Russian combat vehicles, such as the main battle tank (TBC) T-90. "Thirty-four" became the most famous and most massive tank of the Second World War, combining unique fighting qualities with reliability and simplicity in production. On the "Uralvagonzavod" at the end of 1941g. Eleven enterprises were evacuated from the western part of the country. Until the end of the Second World War, Uralvagonzavod launched the 25 thousand 266 T-34s, that is, every second T-34 tank that took part in the hostilities.

The appearance of the Russian T-34 in October 1941g. in the battles of Mtsenskom shocked the German tankers and military leaders. “South of Mtsensk, the 4-I tank division was attacked by Russian tanks, and it had to endure a difficult moment. For the first time, the superiority of the Russian T-34 tanks was sharply manifested. The division suffered significant losses,” German General Heinz Guderian, 2 commander, wrote about this battle. Tank Army Group "Center". The undeniable superiority of the armored forces of the Wehrmacht was questioned.

Adolf Hitler demanded to create an urgent machine capable of resisting the Russian T-34. Designers Dimler-Benz AG and MAN set to work. Meanwhile, the front-line officers of the German army began to advocate the creation of an analogue of the Soviet tank, in order to eliminate the advantage of the Russians as soon as possible. But, even having captured and dismantled the thirty-four trophy trophy, the Germans could not copy this weapon. In particular, due to the shortage of non-ferrous metals, Germany could not start mass production of a diesel engine installed on the T-34. As a result, the German designers took the path of improving the German T-IV tank. In 1942-1943. Medium tanks T-V “Panther” (weighing 35 t) and heavy T-VI “Tiger” (to 60 t), and later “Royal Tiger” (T-VI “Tiger C”) began to descend from the conveyors of German tank-building plants .

Soviet T-34 tank crews had a hard time resisting the German Panthers and Tigers. The German T-VI was armed with an 88-mm cannon and had a 80-100 mm reservation, which the T-34 could only penetrate with the 500-600 m, while the Tiger easily took out the thirty-four with the 1500 m. However, German machines were more capricious in maintenance and repair and much more expensive. The production of the same "Tigers" cost the Germans 1 million Reichsmarks per car, almost twice as expensive as any WWII tank. At the same time, the T-34 "during the war years" fell in price "almost twice.

“Tigers” and “Panthers” on the battlefields of the Great Patriotic War were also opposed by Soviet heavy tanks KV (created before the outbreak of the war) and the IS. The latter was the most powerful tank of the Second World War. The 46-mm gun was installed on the 2-tonne IC-1943 (produced in 1953-122g.), And the 90-100 mm armor was not inferior to the German "Tiger". As is known, in the largest in the military stories tank battle under Prokhorovka 12 July 1943g. on the southern face of the Kursk Bullet 800, Soviet tanks (including the 500 T-34) defeated the 700 Tigers and Panthers from selected German tank divisions.

The tanks that showed their power during the First and Second World Wars became the basis — the iron fist of the ground forces of the strongest armies in the world. Tank makers did not stop improving the combat qualities of these machines even after the Great Victory 9 in May 1945, creating excellent models of equipment in the second half of the 20th century: Leopard tanks (Germany), Abrams tanks (USA), T-90 (Russia), " Leclerc (France), Merkeva (Israel).



Who protects the "iron fist" of Russia

Russia today is the largest exporter of tanks. The main battle tank T-90С (export version) is in service with India, Algeria, Venezuela, Cyprus, Syria, Uganda, as well as Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan. The Indian military highly commended the Russian T-90: this combat vehicle is the main tank of the Armed Forces of India. K 2020g. the Indian army should receive 1,7 thousand T-90С under the concluded contracts with Russia. In addition, in 2006g. A Russian-Indian agreement on the licensed production of this tank was signed, according to which 2019g. More 1 thousand T-90С tanks will be produced in India. The first ten main battle tanks T-90С already Indian production (Indian designation "Bishma") entered service with the 73 regiment of the Indian Land Forces in the summer of 2009. The cost of the entire Russian-Indian program is estimated at 2,5 billion.


In the ranking of the World Arms Trade Analysis Center in terms of the number of new MBTs planned for delivery in 2011-2014. Russia ranks first. During this period, the Russian Federation intends to export 688 main battle tanks worth 1,979 billion. The total volume of Russian MBT exports in the period 2007-2014. 1291 is estimated at $ 3,858 billion. The main competitors of Russia in this field are the USA and Germany. From 2011 to 2014. The US exports 457 tanks "Abrams" in the amount of 4,97 billion dollars, Germany in the same period will export 348 "Leopards" in various versions in the amount of 3,487 billion dollars.

The top five in the 2000's. entered China. At the moment, the Celestial Empire in the ranking of TSAMTO for the period 2007-2014gg. takes place 4 (298 tanks worth about 662,5 million dollars). China’s access to the global MBT market was ensured by the joint MBT-2000 tank project with Pakistan, which was also shipped to Morocco and Myanmar.

For one T-90 three "Leopards" give?

Spring 2010g. It became known about the termination of funding for the project of the Ural Transport Engineering Design Bureau (UKBTM) to create the newest Russian T-95 tank (aka "195 object"). Earlier, the same fate befell the development of the Omsk Transport Engineering Design Bureau - the Black Eagle tank ("640 object", modification of the T-80 У tank). The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation has curtailed support for the projects, considering them unpromising.


According to the doctor of military sciences Konstantin Sivkov, the high cost of the T-95 tank project’s financing was the real reason. “The question was fixed on the price. The T-95, unlike the“ Armata ”, which will be more universal and more simplified, turned out to be too expensive,” said K.Sivkov. On the T-95, it was hoped to significantly strengthen the booking, drastically improve the SLA and install the 152-mm cannon. “The appearance of such a cannon on a Russian tank would mean an automatic superiority in firepower over all other modern foreign tanks. With the advent of such a weapon, they would all automatically become outdated,” he believes.

In 2011 The Ministry of Defense, despite the high marks abroad of the Russian "flying" T-90 tank, announced the termination of purchases of this combat vehicle for the Russian army. Today in the RF Armed Forces of the order of 10 thousand T-72 tanks and their modernization to the level of T-90, according to the Russian military, is several times cheaper than buying new tanks. The refusal to purchase T-90 was accompanied by a fair amount of criticism of domestic armored vehicles. “The weapons that the Russian industry produces, including armored weapons, artillery and small arms, do not correspond to NATO and even China in their parameters,” said Alexander Postnikov, Commander-in-Chief of the Ground Forces (now deputy chief of staff of the Russian Armed Forces) , adding that for 118 million rubles. instead of one T-90 "it is easier to buy three German Leopards." And if in the first case, perhaps the general is somewhere right, then in the second - he obviously got excited, because the new "Leopard" 2 А7 costs at least 6 million dollars ( about 180 million rubles.).


"The 2 A7 leopard does indeed outperform the Russian T-90 in terms of fire control and surveillance tools, as well as more powerful munitions that use depleted uranium," says K.Sivkov. However, according to the expert, the Russian tank has more powerful weapons, since an X-gun caliber 125-mm is installed on the German Leopard against the 90-mm T-120 guns. In addition, the Russian tank is armed with four missiles, allowing you to hit targets at a distance of 5,5 km. “The reliable range of the Leopard’s defeat by standard ammunition - and the others are not available - is only 4 km. The Israeli Merkava tank is about the same, the T-90 has only 3 km,” the expert explains.

That the Indian sun is good, the Russian - "Armata"

After the financing of the T-95 tank project and the abandonment of the T-90 procurement (including the last modification of the T-90A), the Russian tank builders suddenly had a light at the end of the tunnel - the Ministry of Defense announced the creation of a fundamentally new tank based on a universal tracked platform " Armata. " The project was officially approved in March 2012. It is engaged in the development of UKBTM "Uralvagonzavod". The principal difference from the T-90 should be the so-called monitors - an uninhabited tower, in which the ammunition is likely to be placed. At the same time, the crew will be located in the hull in an armored capsule, which theoretically should withstand the hitting of all types of weapons from modern tanks. The tankers will receive information about the situation on the battlefield from thermal imaging, television and laser sensors on the monitor screen. On the basis of the Armata tracked platform it is also planned to create a BMP, a protected vehicle for rescue operations and other armored vehicles.

On the one hand, the need for new weapons is indisputable: the T-90 tank, developed by the Nizhny Tagil design bureau under the leadership of Vladimir Potkin almost 20 years ago (essentially a deep modernization of the T-72) is inevitably obsolete. The Russian military department reasonably notes that it is time to offer a fundamentally new competitive weapon. On the other hand, whether a tank based on the "Armata" is just such a weapon, or just a "lightened" and cheaper version of the T-95, is still unclear. It should not be forgotten that the majority of modern tanks of the leading world powers (including the German Leopards and the American Abrams) are also developed in 1970-1980, and their latest modifications are also the result of deep modernization. However, all these machines, as well as the latest model of the T-90A, are an order of magnitude superior to those of the 30-year-old.


In April, 2012. Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation Nikolai Makarov voiced another sad news for the Russian military industrial complex: purchases of armored vehicles are suspended for five years. Against this background, the information recently appeared in the media about the possible purchase of a license for the production in the Russian Federation of Italian wheeled tanks Centauro (Centaurus), which are already being tested at one of the landfills in the Moscow Region, looks completely illogical.

It seems that the MoD generals rely on foreign models of weapons, not only for the Ground Forces, but also for the Air Force and Navy. Does this mean that it is Israeli drones, French Mistrals and Italian Iveco LMV M65 (Lynx) armored vehicles and Centaurus tanks that will make up the strike force of the Russian army of the future? According to the deputy director of the Institute for Political and Military Analysis, Alexander Khramchikhin, the purchase of foreign equipment of the Ministry of Defense is “educational” in nature. “Russia, indeed, is lagging behind the leading powers in tank construction. It is the engine power, the control system, and the observations in our tanks,” A. Khramchikhin explains. “Firstly, we lost very many technologies in the post-Soviet period, and secondly , completely destroyed the competition in this market in Russia. Therefore, now the military are trying to create it in this way. From this point of view, the purchase of Italian Centauro wheeled tanks is quite logical, we don’t have cars of this class. "

What are we going to fight?

There is one more nuance explaining the actions of the Russian military department: supposedly in the wars of the future there is no place for large tank units. The evolution of modern weapons: the massive use of UAVs, robotic combat systems, "smart" missiles - raises the question of the appropriateness of the use of tanks.

The discussion about the place and role of the main battle tanks in modern armies continues, first of all, in the USA. “Earlier, the United States planned to completely abandon the use of armored units by 2030, going first to the Stryker combat brigade groups, and then to the new concept of Fighting Systems of the Future,” says Igor Korotchenko, director of TSAMTO. the fact that the future US army will predominantly have the character of “expeditionary”, a number of US congressmen and the military believe that there will be no need for a large number of heavy armored vehicles. Despite the fact that the tank Abrams is one s most modern types of weapons, the preservation of their minimum production is not economically feasible, American politicians claim.


However, there is an opposite opinion. Thus, the majority of military experts close the lines for the production of MBT Abrams are unprofitable, because the resumption of production (if necessary) will require 4 times more money than its continuation. “Most likely, the last point of view will prevail in this dispute and the modernization of the Abrams will continue. This is at least confirmed by the fact that in the summer of 2011, the US Army again requested 31 million to modernize another Abrams party, - considers I. Korotchenko.

Russian experts are skeptical about statements that in the near future wars will become “contactless”. The head of the Center for Military Forecasting Anatoly Tsyganok emphasizes that today tanks are the main type of land weapons in both NATO countries and China. In turn, K. Sivkov notes that the need for the presence of tanks is clearly demonstrated by military conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. "In Iraq, for example, the main grouping of US forces was precisely tank units. In Libya, the American aviation she’s also been unable to suppress anti-aircraft defense, and the ground operation was inevitable, "he says.


While the Defense Ministry is waiting for the appearance of a new tank, the Russian army continues to modernize the T-72 and fight on these fairly “battered” machines. So, during the Georgian-South Ossetian conflict 2008. it was T-72, and not the modernized T-90A, that defended the interests of Russia on the firing lines. The new tank on the base of "Amata" will enter the Russian army no earlier than 2015. Obviously, it will take time to master a new combat vehicle. At the same time, the Ministry of Defense plans to purchase all 2 thousand such tanks, considering that this is quite enough to protect the vast expanses of our Motherland. As a result, the question of whether the Russian soldiers will wait for the new military conflict with the participation of the Russian Federation remains open.

According to A. Tsyganka, Russia's participation in a major war in the next five years is unlikely, but local military conflicts are quite possible. These are, for example, the so-called water wars in Central Asia and a possible standoff in Nagorno-Karabakh. "It is not clear yet whether there will be new claims on Nagorno-Karabakh from Baku. However, if the situation again develops into a hot phase, then Russia probably will not stand aside," the expert concludes.
Author:
Originator:
http://top.rbc.ru
116 comments
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. Vanek
    Vanek 19 July 2012 06: 52
    -7
    As one unit from Star Craft 2 says: - DIE DIE DIE.
    1. Dmitriy69
      Dmitriy69 19 July 2012 07: 15
      +49
      Have you noticed? All competitors surpass the T-90 in speed, and the flying ones nicknamed it!
      Any fool can accelerate along the highway, you try to fly over the battlefield without fear that the tank will fall apart!
      1. Vanek
        Vanek 19 July 2012 07: 24
        +30
        Maybe that's why he is flying? The driver Abrams after such a jump, they say, the spine broke.
        1. Cynic
          Cynic 19 July 2012 09: 40
          +14
          Quote: Vanek
          The driver Abrams after such a jump, they say, the spine broke.

          No, at once only the side screens flew off and I had to sort through the chassis all night.
          They talked.
          bully
        2. Captain3
          Captain3 19 July 2012 11: 24
          +10
          It recalls the situation in the Red Army in the 30s, when the commanders of tank regiments competed whose tank was higher and further jumped.
          In each regiment there were specially trained crews and tanks modified on their own for this.
          1. valokordin
            valokordin 19 July 2012 11: 42
            +9
            the tank should not jump, it is not a jumper, but an artillery maneuverable protected gun on wheels, as for the propulsion unit, you need to practically compare the wheeled and the tracked, although this has long been compared. It's just a matter of choice
          2. sergeschern
            sergeschern 18 November 2013 16: 13
            +1
            I read that three days before the planned jumps and the Red Army tank drivers were limited in water - to dehydrate the body (the liver was torn from a hit when it landed!)
        3. sergo0000
          sergo0000 19 July 2012 14: 52
          +10
          Vanek,
          And you try Ivan, in ours jump in! Too I will tell you not sugar. winked
      2. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 19 July 2012 07: 33
        +21
        Quote: Dmitriy69

        Have you noticed? All competitors surpass the T-90 in speed, and the flying ones nicknamed it!
        Any fool can accelerate along the highway, you try to fly over the battlefield without fear that the tank will fall apart!

        I walked on the dirt road 90, and in front of me lane t-72 and I did not catch up with him! So the speed characteristic is underestimated. Sparrow will come, he will say more precisely with what speed they really run.
        1. Cynic
          Cynic 19 July 2012 09: 52
          +8
          Quote: Alexander Romanov
          I walked on the dirt road 90, and in front of me lane t-72

          And on what, if not a secret, did you go along the dirt road beyond the 90th? NVD used?
          At one time, acquaintance with the tanks took place on the highway, parallel to which was the tank track. I still remember how the driver of a suburban bus quickly pushed him to the side of the road and ran around the cabin checking how everything was closed.
          15 minutes after passing the tank column stood, waited for the dust to settle!
          1. Alexander Romanov
            Alexander Romanov 19 July 2012 10: 18
            +10
            Not far from Ussuriysk there is a tank training ground, despite the fact that there is an alternative, sometimes people travel along it.
            Quote: Cynic
            And on what, if not a secret, you walked along the dirt road for 90
            I walked on the brand and not at 90, but at a speed of 90km / hour. And that was the day. Who is on the site from Ussuriysk, I think you will confirm.
            1. Cynic
              Cynic 19 July 2012 10: 28
              +5
              Quote: Alexander Romanov
              You walked on the dirt road beyond the 90th

              Yeah, right essno for 90-that .
              Quote: Alexander Romanov
              from Ussuriysk, I think you will confirm

              Everything can be, only, as they say, I will remain with my opinion.
              In Omsk, we have a tank lane such that you can only slip through on the Kozla, and the Toyota Mark will sit right at the congress.
              1. Alexander Romanov
                Alexander Romanov 19 July 2012 11: 11
                +10
                Quote: Cynic
                that you’ll only slip on the Kozla, and Toyota Mark will sit right at the congress

                Damn Cynic, you’ll be in Primorye -I’ll personally ride you along this road, I won’t want my time. You’ll feel quite tolerant in any passenger car, and if the road is clean, you can keep a hundred hours an hour.
                1. Cynic
                  Cynic 19 July 2012 11: 54
                  +3
                  Quote: Alexander Romanov
                  Damn Cynic, you'll be in Primorye

                  So what is the conversation about!
                  Everyone has their own realities!
                  drinks
          2. vorobey
            vorobey 19 July 2012 11: 02
            +15
            Cynic, I can not help but plyusanut. Those who first found themselves under a tank column on the march felt horror, not fear, but horror. You have not seen how mushroom pickers throw cars and run into the forest in bulk.
            And the rest is true. The king is in his head, the rest in the column behind him are hauling dust. As for the mechanics, for the commanders only teeth and eyes are white.
            1. Cynic
              Cynic 19 July 2012 12: 02
              +7
              Quote: vorobey
              You have not seen how mushroom pickers throw cars and run into the forest in bulk.

              Passengers of a white passenger car as chalk and 55-ku thirty centimeters from her saw. They decided to shorten the road, unwrapped the barrier and decided to shorten it.
              We nearly reduced the life path.
              Those who first found themselves under a tank column on the march felt horror, not fear, but horror.

              On its own, delight is a pure unclouded childish delight.
              drinks
              1. vorobey
                vorobey 19 July 2012 13: 34
                +5
                Children do not count. it's not fair. the boys themselves climbed almost under the tracks.
                1. Cynic
                  Cynic 19 July 2012 19: 04
                  +1
                  Quote: vorobey
                  Children do not count

                  Children, they are, this is the most grow! Become adults!
                  wink
        2. vorobey
          vorobey 19 July 2012 10: 10
          +9
          Came, I say hi. Sledge, you are very excited, check the speedometer. In the school 72, it was possible to disperse on the ground to 47, the young one was green, and in the troops 64 to 65 they were dispersed, but on the concrete road, and it was already difficult to manage it.
          1. Alexander Romanov
            Alexander Romanov 19 July 2012 10: 26
            +4
            Hi Sasha, I am writing as it was. The people who live in Ussuriysk, the route towards the reserve, which you go from the side of the sugar factory and then at the fork at the fork in the landfill, those who drive along that road-loving met. At what speed they drive there, or to hell with whom, what can you prove.
      3. Kangarli
        Kangarli 19 July 2012 07: 33
        0
        Any fool can accelerate along the highway, you try to fly over the battlefield without fear that the tank will fall apart!


        In Israel, they tried and it worked.

        1. Dmitriy69
          Dmitriy69 19 July 2012 07: 39
          +25
          Quote: Kangarli
          In Israel, they tried and it worked.

          Has anyone seen this tank after landing?
          1. Alexander Romanov
            Alexander Romanov 19 July 2012 07: 44
            +24
            Quote: Dmitriy69
            Has anyone seen this tank after landing?

            Saw, saw, steelworkers in an open-hearth furnace laughing
          2. Kangarli
            Kangarli 19 July 2012 07: 46
            +3
            Yes, one friend of mine who took a course in Israel saw only that one was Mk4.
        2. vorobey
          vorobey 19 July 2012 10: 12
          +17
          The effect exceeded all expectations.
        3. segamegament
          segamegament 19 July 2012 17: 42
          +3
          And at the same time there wasn’t enough spirit to shoot, or did diapers change quickly at that moment? 66 tons of metal did not fall into the promised land?
        4. Cynic
          Cynic 19 July 2012 19: 10
          +2
          Quote: Kangarli
          In Israel, they tried and it worked.

          As the saying goes: For a tank jumping fearless - scary to land bully
      4. genzik161
        genzik161 19 July 2012 08: 31
        +18
        You are right if my memory serves me in 98 in Abu Dhabi the T-80u flew about 5 meters during demonstration performances, landed and drove on, and the American abrams trying to repeat the flight after landing fell apart
      5. Cynic
        Cynic 19 July 2012 09: 38
        +14
        Quote: Dmitriy69
        and they called him flying!

        Too bad, to be honest. all these stolen epithets T-90.
        Flying was, is and will be for a long time only the T-80 and its modifications.
        And this title was given to him not by our engaged media, but by foreign specialists at an exhibition in Abu Dhabi!
        1. 11Goor11
          11Goor11 19 July 2012 19: 41
          +3
          Cynic, why if our media is biased?
          It is unlikely that in any of the countries, OWN is more faulty than ours sad
          1. Cynic
            Cynic 20 July 2012 13: 42
            0
            Quote: 11Goor11
            OWN more hayut than ours

            Unfortunately, it is simply a statement of fact specifically on this episode.
            Confusing constantly the epithets of machines is fundamentally impossible. If this happens, then there is an order.
            So tell me why you have a modernized 80-ka T-84, and we have a deeply modernized 72-ka T-90?
            And there is no modernized 80s at all! And there are a lot of them in service.
            After all, here and seditious thought I can sneak up that the last word of the T-90 tank construction (well, how many of them actually made from scratch, but did not finish the existing iron?) In fact does not exceed 80, but by and large where loses.
            No.
        2. Basarev
          Basarev 16 January 2014 13: 35
          0
          They say there is an incredibly cool T-80UM1 Bars - the most flying tank
      6. Captain3
        Captain3 19 July 2012 17: 11
        +3
        Have you noticed? All competitors surpass the T-90 in speed, and the flying ones nicknamed it!
        Any fool can accelerate along the highway, you try to fly over the battlefield without fear that the tank will fall apart!

        So what kind of new attack aircraft will arrive in the Air Force by 2020! good
      7. GSH-18
        GSH-18 28 October 2013 12: 04
        +1
        Quote: Dmitriy69
        Have you noticed? All competitors surpass the T-90 in speed, and the flying ones nicknamed it!
        Anyone can accelerate along the highway, you try to fly over the battlefield without fear that the tank will fall apart!

        Yes. There is an obvious inconsistency in the article .. Well, okay. But regarding the accuracy of gunfire, the T-90 is very even on the level (if not the best). In the "military secret" on the REN they showed, in comparison with the leopard and Abrams, and with something else, the T-90 is not inferior, and the leopard even surpasses in rate of fire and accuracy (8-9 hits out of 10!). The article, intentionally or not, belittles the real capabilities of the T-90. Despite the fact that the reviews of foreign buyers are positive. Most likely, the MO wants to get a conceptually new MBT. Because of this and friction with UVZ. Nothing wrong. Let's wait for Armatu soldier
    2. Vanek
      Vanek 19 July 2012 07: 53
      +9
      In the picture "Tiger" the head (tower) was broken. With "Leopards", "Abrams", "Challengers" and "Leclercs" will also be.
  2. aksakal
    aksakal 19 July 2012 07: 21
    +8
    A good, objective article, without those very phrases that the professor dislikes so much -)))).
    But it leaves a bit of anxiety - it is not clear at all what they have in mind in the MO. Some kind of robots instead of tanks. Here, yes, I am loyal to military innovations (well, exoskeletons and "smart" bullets were actively defended at the office), so even I caught sour from such prospects. How smart are the robots at the moment to fight? As far as I know, not yet that much. Problems with recognition remain, problems with decision-making in a non-standard setting, problems with the same "glitches" have not been resolved. For example, it is a great achievement if a robot car in a small settlement reaches its destination without accidents and on its own. Not to mention the "fight"! If the military means remote control of equipment, it is robots, this is a remotely controlled technique and effective methods of dealing with this are not known only to the Papuans of New Guinea.
    1. M. Peter
      M. Peter 19 July 2012 09: 56
      +2
      I agree, there are a lot of things left out. But all the same, it is better to solve the problems with the machine embodied in the iron, rather than thinking about the drawings and excite your own imagination, but will it be and will not?
  3. Averias
    Averias 19 July 2012 09: 06
    +8
    As the advantages and disadvantages of tanks showed: T-90, Abrams, Turkish (I do not remember the model), Anglitsky and Cheetah. Our cooler came out. I wasn’t too lazy, because what the media and TV say is not always, to put it mildly, the truth, I rummaged in nete and spoke to people who knew. Damn, it turned out to be true. And the fact that our tank, after several hits of anti-tank weapons, came under its own power to refuel and drove on. It is admirable. Although I can not and will not insist on my point of view. It is quite possible that I am mistaken. Not strong in tanks.
    1. Basarev
      Basarev 16 January 2014 13: 41
      0
      They say that in Chechnya the T-90 turned out to be completely immune to the anti-tank weapons of the militants.
  4. Jeglov
    Jeglov 19 July 2012 09: 16
    +13
    I think if "tomorrow is war, if tomorrow is on a campaign ..." Russia will put up instead of full-fledged tank armies, an army of optimizers and effective managers from the Ministry of Defense ...
    This fraternity will be worse than any adversary. laughing
  5. tank64rus
    tank64rus 19 July 2012 10: 00
    +2
    Our top management of the Ministry of Defense is only interested in cash flows. To see the prospects for the development of armored vehicles in the world and development trends are seemingly lack of time. A tank with standard UAVs and ammunition with seeker striking from the upper hemisphere, with network-centric control systems, active protection complexes, camouflage means in various ranges EMP, etc. All of this is already being developed abroad for individual elements. But after the "optimization" of the Academies and other universities, there is nobody to see and develop. All this was proposed in Russia 20 years ago.
    1. Basarev
      Basarev 16 January 2014 13: 43
      0
      Something I did not hear about tanks with full-time drones.
  6. M. Peter
    M. Peter 19 July 2012 10: 00
    +3
    And battles and wars can be won with the help of old tanks.
    And all past wars are proof of this. The main thing is learning and dysplina.
    Let the enemy have a steeper tank, but if you know how to use what you have, then you can win.
    The Germans at the beginning of the war crushed the Red Army, which had the best tanks. Then the situation changed in the opposite, with the presence of better tanks, the Germans could not oppose the Red Army.
    1. Big lexey
      Big lexey 19 July 2012 10: 41
      +3
      But how much easier and more correct it is to win on a technique that surpasses the enemy! Their soldiers must not only be taught to win well, but also to be protected.
    2. sapulid
      sapulid 19 July 2012 12: 20
      +3
      "And battles and wars can be won with the help of old tanks.
      And all past wars are proof of this. The main thing is learning and dysplina.
      Let the enemy have a steeper tank, but if you know how to use what you have, then you can win.
      At the beginning of the war, the Germans crushed the Red Army, which had the best tanks. Then the situation changed into the opposite, with the presence of better tanks, the Germans could not oppose anything to the Red Army. "

      Peter, in T-34, against Abrams, weak? Or, are you fighting with someone else's hands? You should, in your hands, for such writing. You need to think not only with the gyrus that is behind and below the waist. By the way, you need to know the Russian language too. Otherwise, YOU KNOW, they will not understand the code.
      1. biznaw
        biznaw 29 October 2013 02: 30
        +1
        against Abrams at a distance from km to head - weakly, and if from a ravine or shed to a side with 300 meters not even sub-caliber or cumulative, but a simple fragmentation or blank disc - not weakly, the crew of the Abrams from blacks and pid_s if not from pf shell, so from diarrhea will come out of the battle.
        Definitely would prefer a walking battle from an ambush with an RPG, an ambush battle at t34
  7. ShturmKGB
    ShturmKGB 19 July 2012 10: 04
    +9
    High-tech equipment will end quickly during a large-scale war, and then the war will be medium and primitive in terms of technology.
    1. Big lexey
      Big lexey 19 July 2012 10: 44
      +5
      In the event of a global conflict, high-tech equipment will "end" almost instantly, and then there will be a war with stone weapons, and then, if humanity is lucky enough to survive the nuclear winter.
      1. biznaw
        biznaw 29 October 2013 02: 39
        0
        The catastrophic consequences were greatly exaggerated, it was dealt with more than once on this and other resources. And also read the reports of the Ministry of Emergency Situations on the impact on the climate of massive forest fires and the oil fields of Kuwait and Iraq, it is not. Only a decrease or increase in sun activity can affect. Therefore, the war will continue even after the last rounds have been used up and the subsequent destruction of the enemy by sapper and garden shovels. It will end only after the victory flag is stuck in the ruins of the enemy’s capital.
  8. LTL70
    LTL70 19 July 2012 10: 06
    +4
    Well, okay, the clever people from the Defense Ministry are slyly philosophizing that 3 Leopards are better than 1-T95, and why you Dmitry Olegovich won't say a firm word - you are defining the development strategy of the Russian Armed Forces ?! And for me, "less is more" is an old tried and tested slogan. Why feed the Western military-industrial complex (potential enemy) and crush your own inflated competition ??! The question immediately arises: is it only Navalny, Alekseeva, Kovalev and other shushara who are ready to change Russia - maybe the Ministry of Defense bureaucrats endowed with real power are ready to betray the country's interests ???!
    1. Big lexey
      Big lexey 19 July 2012 10: 50
      +4
      I am afraid that not only bureaucrats from the Moscow Region are ready to sell the interests of our country.
      The ability of individual scum to "sell" everything and everyone for a penny profit can only be stopped by a firm hand. All of this comes from the worship of the golden calf, this foundation of Western civilization. The prevalence of the private over the general.
    2. Basarev
      Basarev 16 January 2014 13: 45
      0
      I would still prefer the T-95 - it still comes out cheaper than foreign tanks and is also armed with a 152-mm cannon - this is not zilch.
  9. Ottofonfenhel
    Ottofonfenhel 19 July 2012 10: 12
    +7
    All the tank experts in our country say that the tank retains mobility its weight should not exceed 50 tons, the "Abrams" and "Leo" have long crawled over 60, on rough terrain mobility plays a decisive role, according to the principle of firing and dumping, while the enemy wakes up you are no longer there, the abrams are not badly protected but inactive turret on caterpillars, dviglo in 1500l. only for that it is worth to somehow drag a 60-ton pile of metal.
  10. Jeglov
    Jeglov 19 July 2012 10: 52
    +27
    Orthodox people! How would I explain in such a way that it was understandable ... To compare the tanks of the Russian (or rather, Soviet) school of tank building and the Western (or, more precisely, German) school, it’s the same as comparing thick and sour ones. The tanks of these schools were created from completely different ideas about the nature of the actions of the troops of the warring parties in a likely third world war, primarily in the European theater of operations. If the goal of the SA was the speedy advance of ground troops across Europe and access to the Rhine, and then the Lamans, in order to deprive the main enemy (USA) of the European bridgehead and primarily air bases, then NATO's goal was the opposite - to prevent the loss of European theater of operations. Based on this, the basis of the ground forces — tanks — was designed. Pay attention to the mass of t-90 (t-72) - 46,5 tons. Soviet main tanks did not go beyond the 50 ton line. It was connected:
    1. With the need to quickly transfer the mass of tanks along the railway tracks and forcing bridges - not every railway platform and bridge can withstand a fool under 70 tons in weight.
    2. In the SA, based on the experience of the Great Patriotic War, the mass use of tanks was assumed - this required mass production. Therefore, they tried to reduce the cost of production without reducing combat effectiveness. The increase in tank weight to the weight category of Western tanks - about 70 tons, respectively, increased the cost of production of a combat unit. This is especially important in wartime, when the mobilized industry must continuously compensate for the inevitable losses in technology in conditions of difficult supply.
    3. In the Soviet tank building school, they tried to increase the reserved volume without increasing, again, the mass of the tank. This had its pros and cons.
    4. The most painful topic of Soviet tank building are engines. Well, it didn’t work for our industry to create a diesel engine that was both compact, reliable and powerful enough. This is an eternal problem of our tank construction, it has been going on since pre-war times. From that they cast their eyes on the GTE.
    The Western (German) school of tank building is founded, sucking on opposing ideas. The goal was to create not so much a tank as a powerful, well-armored anti-tank weapon. Designed to stop the "hordes" of Soviet tanks "rolling" Europe, scorched by nuclear heat, on the asphalt.
    During the Cold War, the military and military equipment designers acted in concert. The military set the task - “we need a combat vehicle for this and that,” and the designers and industry tried to fulfill the order as accurately as possible according to those. assignment.
    Now in the Russian Federation and in the CIS, everything is exactly the opposite. The military, or rather the fashionable “effective managers” and “optimizers” from the Ministries of Defense and the General Staff, generally don’t have a clear idea why the hell they need tanks (they know how bigots to cut efficiently, but they know little about tanks). The current industry, not having a clear idea of ​​what they should produce, is trying to sell more expensively what is “in the warehouse”.
    Here is such an oil painting ... request

    1. vorobey
      vorobey 19 July 2012 11: 28
      +11
      Quote: Jeglov
      "Hordes" of Soviet tanks "rolling" Europe, scorched by nuclear heat, into the asphalt.


      would listen and listen .. to the measured roar of a diesel engine on the autobahn on the way to the lamb.
      1. neri73-r
        neri73-r 19 July 2012 12: 48
        +3
        Ohhhh, I'm with you, to the Lamansh! laughing
        1. biznaw
          biznaw 29 October 2013 02: 42
          0
          And write me down.
        2. SOKOL777
          SOKOL777 24 December 2013 13: 49
          +1
          1. sats
            sats 28 December 2013 03: 59
            0
            IS-2
            v svoe vremja zreliwe soten etih mawin ispugalo trumena i cherchilja do takoj stepeni, 4to oni ostanovili svoi armii i ne stali brosatj atomnie bomby
      2. SOKOL777
        SOKOL777 24 December 2013 13: 42
        0
        Quote: vorobey
        would listen and listen .. to the measured roar of a diesel engine on the autobahn on the way to the lamb.


        Why, let's go ...
      3. Cynic
        Cynic 24 December 2013 19: 37
        0
        Quote: vorobey
        diesel engine roar

        I whistle more turbine to the soul!
        1. Basarev
          Basarev 16 January 2014 13: 50
          0
          And to me - the screech of a rocket escaping from a cannon!
    2. 11Goor11
      11Goor11 19 July 2012 20: 02
      +2
      Jeglov
      The “optimizers” from the Ministries of Defense and the General Staff generally don’t have a clear idea why the heck they need tanks (they know how to cut down efficiently, but they know little about tanks)

      It is unlikely that young people aged 20 to 30 make strategic decisions?
      We all know that now main the money goes to delivery vehicles of nuclear weapons, air defense, air defense and aviation.
      And to send 10 thousand T-72 tanks for re-melting with a lack of funds for all the best? Even America is reducing initial procurement plans, this is with their ability to print money.
      Everything in the Russian Ministry of Defense is understood as well as we are. And what to upgrade and how much new to buy. Accusations of total corruption? Countryman, do you know that for sure? According to the principle - "it cannot be that they should not steal"?
    3. GSH-18
      GSH-18 28 October 2013 12: 33
      0
      Quote: Jeglov
      If the goal of the SA was the speedy advance of the ground forces across Europe and reaching the Rhine, and then Lamanche, in order to deprive the main enemy (USA) of the European bridgehead and primarily air bases, then NATO's goal was the opposite - to prevent the loss of European theater of operations. Based on this, the basis of the ground forces — tanks — was designed.

      Actually, the USSR was never going to attack Europe, on the contrary, the NATO countries led by states repeatedly planned nuclear strikes, followed by ground operations against the USSR and the Warsaw Pact countries!
  11. Jeglov
    Jeglov 19 July 2012 11: 32
    +1
    vorobey,
    Quote: vorobey
    would listen and listen .. to the measured roar of a diesel engine on the autobahn on the way to the lamb.

    Yes you are a romantic!
    1. vorobey
      vorobey 19 July 2012 11: 50
      +12
      We Russians love to travel, though we usually pay more return visits.
      1. neri73-r
        neri73-r 19 July 2012 12: 49
        +1
        Traditions, there are traditions !!!
  12. cth; fyn
    cth; fyn 19 July 2012 11: 55
    +2
    I propose to modify the T-80 and T-90 as it did with the T-72 turning it into a T-90.
    Everyone knows the weaknesses of the T-90, the weak side and weak armor near the cannon, large guidance devices that are easily hit from armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, thanks to their quick-firing guns, cover the track from the front with a slab, then it will be much harder to break, but it will cause some problems , but life is more expensive than 2-3 extra hours in the workshop, why am I listing them all and so they know how to fix them, our engineers just don’t want to think about it, and really why? when he receives the money in a month, but he doesn’t need to do any nifig. Now, if another conversation would stimulate him with a carrot and a stick, maybe progress would be.
    1. Armata
      Armata 19 July 2012 12: 03
      +2
      But is it worth our engineers to rush for modification, to work out for the sake of work so that then they can redo everything? There is no TK from the Ministry of Defense, so everyone is happy with everything; there will be a TK for modification; So roll on the wrong barrel.
      1. Cynic
        Cynic 19 July 2012 12: 20
        0
        Quote: Steam Train
        TK from MO no

        You might think the T-90 TK was.
        1. Armata
          Armata 19 July 2012 14: 51
          +1
          Quote: Cynic
          You might think the T-90 TK was.

          No one will work without development funding, purely for themselves.
    2. Cynic
      Cynic 19 July 2012 12: 19
      +2
      Quote: cth; fyn
      I propose to modify the T-80 and T-90

      The T-80 is everything, no modifications. Have given up Ukraine.
      Here is the T-90 that modify and modify.
      True, for some reason we fly with him at tenders, less modern cars win.
      T-90 sounds powerful - 90! and the T-80, modestly so, 80.
      bully
  13. Jeglov
    Jeglov 19 July 2012 11: 56
    +17
    Quote: vorobey
    We Russians love to travel, though we usually pay more return visits.
  14. Nechai
    Nechai 19 July 2012 11: 59
    +4
    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    there was 90 on the dirt road, and in front of me was the T-72 and I didn’t catch up with it!

    The result is not only and not so much dependent on the technical characteristics of the machine as on the real possibility and ability of the mechanical drive at the moment.
    Quote: Vanek
    The driver Abrams after such a jump, they say, the spine broke.

    unlikely - he is in a semi-recumbent position, in the "combat" mode, but will shake him out of the armchair with a high degree of probability (which has happened repeatedly even at shows). + Such a feature that the amers, that the brit, have mech.waters during long marches in the course of multi-day actions on the ground very often fall asleep at their "workplace".
    Quote: vorobey
    would listen and listen .. to the measured roar of a diesel engine on the autobahn on the way to the lamb.

    It would be better to go to the Lamansh under the whistle of a turbo-exhaust and the rolling of the geese Yes, and the speed was higher ....
    The T-80 when moving towards you (depending on the direction of the wind) becomes HEARINGly rewinding chunks of meters from 400-300, and the tournament whistle is much, much closer. Acoustic stealth, straight word.
    1. vorobey
      vorobey 19 July 2012 12: 06
      +5
      Do not break, buzz. You have to get pleasure from everything you do. Even travel, so that your face in memory remains at the genetic level. And if we share the bread, to drive in general to Ah.
    2. Cynic
      Cynic 19 July 2012 12: 11
      +2
      Quote: Nechai
      it becomes HEARINGly rewinding chunks of meters from 400-300, and the tournament whistle is much, much closer. Acoustic Stealth

      And if on polyurethane, then a semi-infarction is provided, if you think about it and will rub through the territory without looking back.
      wink
      1. vorobey
        vorobey 19 July 2012 12: 17
        +6
        Cynic, we have such mechanics on tactics so we were kidding in the school. An unforgettable sight when a freshman, sneaking up on a thoughtful 80, starts pushing him in the ass. The master from wheelbarrows is resting. The reaction was seen very different.
  15. sapulid
    sapulid 19 July 2012 12: 08
    +2
    "We Russians love to travel, though to a greater extent we usually pay return visits." Sparrow.

    It is right. Any people will fight for their country. Notice where they gave back, they won there, and where they climbed first, they got there. The morale of the troops is high in only two cases:
    1. Minimum losses, with maximum adversary

    2. It doesn’t matter what losses are during the destruction of the hated enemy. Or, in other words, destruction at any cost.
  16. Kars
    Kars 19 July 2012 12: 13
    +8
    medium tanks T-V "Panther" (weighing 35 tons) and heavy T-VI "Tiger" (up to 60 tons) began to roll off the conveyors of tank-building plants in Germany

    In the Kursk Bulge, 800 Soviet tanks (including 500 T-34s) defeated 700 Tigers and Panthers from selected German tank divisions.




    The article is certainly interesting, but elementary errors raise doubts about the professionalism of the author, and this is only at the beginning.
  17. Stealth
    Stealth 19 July 2012 12: 18
    +1
    I was struck by the phrase in the article: "As you know, in the largest tank battle in military history near Prokhorovka on July 12, 1943, on the southern face of the Kursk Bulge 800 Soviet tanks (including 500 T-34) defeated 700 "Tigers" and "Panthers" from selected German armored divisions. "
    Of course, I understand everything, patriotism is good, but damn it, you can't lie so shamelessly !!! Near Prokhorovka, 1000 tanks operated on the part of the Red Army, and less than 300 from the German, while not all of these 300 were "Tigers" and "Panthers", or more precisely, the "Tigers" were 20 vehicles for 2 divisions. The bulk of the German equipment was made up of the good old T-4 and T-3. Of course, the Germans had an advantage, because they defended themselves, had longer-range guns and better optics, but all this does not negate the fact that the Germans were stupidly crushed with meat near Prokhorovka, and General Rotmistrov, who commanded the 5th Panzer Army, after this battle, almost got shot.
    1. vorobey
      vorobey 19 July 2012 12: 48
      +5
      Quote: Stealth
      from the Red Army there were 1000 tanks, and from the German less than 300 tanks,

      But from this place in more detail. source
      1. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 19 July 2012 13: 03
        +8
        Sanya, do not argue with the wretched. Suffice it to recall the tank corps ss. And the number of tanks in the German division.
        Quote: vorobey
        from the Red Army there were 1000 tanks, and from the German less than 300 tanks,
        USE is bearing fruit fool
        1. vorobey
          vorobey 19 July 2012 13: 38
          +4
          There is no EGE in the internet until the damn materials with the most diverse analyzes. I really like when they take the memoirs of the same Rotmistrov and begin to incriminate him referring to unknown to whom. And when they distort the facts.
          1. Alexander Romanov
            Alexander Romanov 19 July 2012 14: 39
            +5
            About two years ago on TV I watched a program about the Battle of Kursk, I almost fell off the nightstand. Loss of irretrievable Germans amounted to 4four tank !!!!!!!!! In my opinion here on the site there was an article of some kind of daunao, that air fights were extinct. He cited facts in the form of cubic meters of air divided by the number of aircraft and their speed. Concluded that our and German aircraft could not meet in the air laughing To write and to write, almost the same thing, it all depends on where the stress is put
    2. neri73-r
      neri73-r 19 July 2012 13: 33
      +1
      That you there in Lviv tell about 1000 and 300 ratio! And it’s better right away: the Red Army on the Kursk Bulge had all its tanks, and the Germans only had a battalion !!! So zapadensky right!
      1. Stealth
        Stealth 19 July 2012 23: 33
        +4
        I will answer immediately to everyone, and as usual from the end:
        Quote: neri73-r
        then you tell yourself in Lviv about the 1000 and 300 ratio! And it’s better right away: the Red Army on the Kursk Bulge had all its tanks, and the Germans only had a battalion !!! So zapadensky right!

        I bring to the attention of angry gop patriots:
        1. I live in Sevastopol and have a rather negative attitude towards zapadentsev.
        2. Instead of insults and the transition to personalities, it is better to provide facts that refute my point of view.
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        Sanya, do not argue with the wretched. Suffice it to recall the tank corps ss. And the number of tanks in the German division.

        One more ... Instead of thinking about how to deftly insult the interlocutor, it would be better to think about what you are writing. Only 2 SS divisions ("Reich" and "Hitler") took part in the battle near Prokhorovka from the German side, full-time German tank division - 200 tanks and self-propelled guns. Especially for gop patriots, I explain: this means that in two divisions, there could be a maximum of 400 tanks and self-propelled guns (of all types) !!! And in this article is the number 700 "Tigersand "Panther"!!! Ponder these numbers before writing angry rebuffs to me. And now add to this that before the battles near Prokhorovka these two divisions had already broken through 2 well-fortified defense lines and actually defeated 5 Guards. Stalingrad tank corps. Naturally, in all these battles they suffered losses, so the figure of 300 tanks and self-propelled guns, IMHO, looks very objective.
        Quote: vorobey
        But from this place in more detail. source

        There are a lot of sources, well, for example, http://kursk1943.mil.ru/kursk/oob/index.html, but in general I have read from many authors about the Battle of Kursk and tried to compare and develop an objective point of view. In general, I don't understand a little, you seem to be a tanker yourself, do you really believe that "500 T-34s defeated 700" Tigers "and" Panthers "(c), which were also on the defensive? ...
        In short, I appeal to everyone! Gentlemen, patriotism is good! BUT!!! Hurray-patriotism is bad, because deters the possibility of objective assessment and leads to dangerous mistakes. Avoid extremes, do not tarnish the history of the Russian and Soviet army with silly fictions. Otherwise, you become like modern Ukrainian "historians" who prove the antiquity of "the people of ukrov". One must know and be proud of the successes of one's country and the army, but at the same time one must know and acknowledge its failures - this is the way to further improvement. With respect to all interlocutors.
        1. Kars
          Kars 20 July 2012 00: 03
          +3
          Here I look very long ---- the author is a writer along the way, not a historian or a tank lover --- most likely he just introduced 700 tigers and panthers for a red slobber. I mean 700 tanks, if you count it all together, you can get so much with certain efforts in this sector of the front.

          And as for the Tigers and Panthers, there were 2200 and 148 of them out of 200 German tanks concentrated for the Citator, respectively.
          1. Kars
            Kars 20 July 2012 00: 05
            +3
            The Battle of Kursk and the Fritz tanks themselves are very well disassembled. There are even separate monographs from the Front-line illustration series in the Literature.

            And then they became like that.
            1. Kars
              Kars 20 July 2012 00: 08
              +2
              Rather, such --- Verkhngiy then Kharkov February-March 1943
  18. Brother Sarych
    Brother Sarych 19 July 2012 12: 37
    +4
    The article is quite old - in the original source of the comments it was higher than the roof, almost no one unconditionally agreed with the author ...
    By the way, it’s hard to agree with some of the author’s statements, they already wrote about Prokhorovka, but they did the T-28 like the Vickers, and not based on it - the British didn’t sell the tank! They have no more similarities than the T-34 and Panther ...
  19. Jeglov
    Jeglov 19 July 2012 12: 48
    +8
    Quote: Kars
    The article is certainly interesting, but elementary errors raise doubts about the professionalism of the author, and this is only at the beginning.

    I agree, the author has bent.
    Well, nothing, an article on the level of somewhere in the 3+ or 4- on a 5-point scale. Nothing, here one "specialist" on the t-34 squeezed an article, so it turned out that we had a SOUTH Military District in the 41st year (!)! He, how it is!

    Quote: Stealth
    The phrase in the article was striking: "As you know, in the largest tank battle in military history near Prokhorovka on July 12, 1943, 800 Soviet tanks (including 500 T-34s) defeated 700 Tigers and Panthers on the southern face of the Kursk Bulge. from selected German armored divisions. "
    Of course, I understand everything, patriotism is good, but damn it, you can't lie so shamelessly !!! Near Prokhorovka, 1000 tanks operated on the part of the Red Army, and less than 300 from the German, while not all of these 300 were "Tigers" and "Panthers", or more precisely, the "Tigers" were 20 vehicles for 2 divisions. The bulk of the German equipment was made up of the good old T-4 and T-3. Of course, the Germans had an advantage, because they defended themselves, had longer-range guns and better optics, but all this does not negate the fact that the Germans were stupidly crushed with meat near Prokhorovka, and General Rotmistrov, who commanded the 5th Panzer Army, after this battle, almost got shot.

    Well, let's say not 300, but for 400 (more precisely 413 - together with the 2nd and 3rd TKK), Rotmistrov’s 5 TA had not 1000, but 826 tanks and self-propelled guns (and the T-34 - 463 units) - not counting those that were under repair and on the way to Prokhorovka. Moreover, not all tanks took part directly in the main phase of the battle (it is hard to shove this mass between the river and the railway).
    By the way, no one was going to shoot Rotmistrov.
    1. Stealth
      Stealth 19 July 2012 23: 42
      +1
      I do not understand what has 3 tk to the battle of Prokhorovka? From the German side, only 2 TDs took part in it, with 400 tanks and self-propelled guns totaling over the state, now we’ll take away losses in previous battles during the breakthrough of the defense and the unleashing of 5 Guards. Stalingrad corps, and so it turns out about 300 tanks. Rotmistrova crushed at the expense of - maybe the dupe, if honestly, I don’t remember where I read about it, but, in principle, I believe willingly because Comrade has a temper. Stalin was cool.
  20. Diesel
    Diesel 19 July 2012 12: 53
    +4
    Damn the Chinese for a long time diesel 1500l.s. is, but we can’t create our own, sadly ...
    1. Big lexey
      Big lexey 19 July 2012 14: 15
      +2
      Quote: Diesel
      Damn the Chinese for a long time diesel 1500l.s. is, but we can’t create our own, sadly


      We are shy about copying, and the Chinese put on copyright ... a device.
      We can't, we are civilized. Here Mr. Mikhalkov receives dividends from every DVD-disc sold in the country. In their opinion, we copy only Citadels and other immortal creations of this author on them, on blanks ...
      I think it’s time for us to decide that we are not Europeans, to be called Eurasian and act as we want.
    2. Green 413-1685
      Green 413-1685 19 July 2012 14: 29
      +1
      It's not just about power, but also about reliability. Here you are, honestly, honestly, believe in the reliability of the Chinese engine?
      1. Diesel
        Diesel 19 July 2012 16: 34
        +2
        I doubt the reliability of the Chinese engine of its own design, but not the Chinese copy of the German engine)
        1. Green 413-1685
          Green 413-1685 19 July 2012 17: 24
          +5
          The fact of the matter is that in order to thoroughly copy such a complex device as the engine for an airplane, or even for a tank, you need to be at least on the same ones. level. As practice shows with copies of our sophisticated technique, the Chinese have a particular strain on this. Material science is stupid to copy, without having its own developed scientific base on this topic is impossible. And for the Germans, despite the fact that the culture of military equipment is traditionally very strong, the technical solutions themselves are very complicated and demanding to observe the entire cycle from material to the thoroughness of material implementation.
          1. M. Peter
            M. Peter 19 July 2012 17: 58
            +2
            In-in. Especially why a tank of 50 tons, such an engine?
            By the way, I doubt that they have a German engine. All the same, the dimensions of the car are not the same.
            1. Kars
              Kars 19 July 2012 18: 09
              +3
              With 1500 horses, the data doesn’t come in --- maybe this is the last modification and so
              1200 hp turbocharged water-cooled diesel engine is a derivative of the German WD396

              And China is going to continue
              Ukraine and China are preparing the expansion of the $ 2011 million contract concluded in 20 for the supply of Ukrainian power plants with a 6TD-2E engine (1200 hp) for the Chinese MBT-2000 main battle tank.
        2. Basarev
          Basarev 16 January 2014 14: 02
          0
          Compactness also plays a significant role
  21. Jeglov
    Jeglov 19 July 2012 13: 22
    +1
    Quote: Steam Train
    But is it worth our engineers to rush for modification, to work out for the sake of work so that then they can redo everything? There is no TK from the Ministry of Defense, so everyone is happy with everything; there will be a TK for modification; So roll on the wrong barrel.

    Regretfully, I have to agree.
    1. vorobey
      vorobey 19 July 2012 14: 12
      +3
      But not me. The desire of creation is not present engineers. But on enthusiasm purely for myself at my discretion to create something great.

      When Koshkin designed the T34, there was also a debate about the concept of application and there was no consensus on tactics. The classic Guderian only tried and he managed to bring everything together. By the way, it is still relevant today. I even got the opinion whether the creators of our light medium and heavy brigades draw inspiration from there.

      Therefore TK Tzem. and no one canceled his work, otherwise TOS1 and BMPT would not have been born. Yes, they have not yet found application, but you must agree and there is no single concept. about TOS went too far.

      The engine is just too lazy to work for free. Be-be-be-be ..
      1. igor67
        igor67 19 July 2012 14: 26
        +2
        vorobey,
        I looked at YouTube about the tank battle in Iraq. In general, the point is that when the amers defeated the Iraqis there and a captured Iraqi general saw a photo of Guderian in the tank, he was shocked and asked why the photo of the enemy was carried in the tank, he received the answer that Guderian was an enemy, but they learn from him as a great strategist
        1. vorobey
          vorobey 19 July 2012 14: 38
          +3
          Igor agrees. I consider Erwin Rommel to be my other teacher.
          1. igor67
            igor67 19 July 2012 15: 01
            +1
            . Winston Churchill, speaking in the House of Commons, said: “We have a very experienced and courageous opponent in front of us and, I must admit, despite this devastating war, a great commander” (“We have a very daring and skillful opponent against us, and, may I say across the havoc of war, a great general ").

            Erwin Rommel
            1. vorobey
              vorobey 19 July 2012 15: 18
              +2
              I once repeated his trick with field kitchens in a slightly different guise, and most interestingly, it worked.
      2. Armata
        Armata 19 July 2012 14: 49
        +5
        Sasha, if I were too lazy to work for free then there wouldn’t be a new turret with CAM BAS control now. Moreover, positioning is many times more accurate than any analogue in the world. Only she didn’t need 6 for years, and now when I urgently take it out and put it down, I had to redo 50% of the work again because it didn’t fit the TK. So the point is not laziness, but the lack of demand for MO in these movements.
        1. Kars
          Kars 19 July 2012 15: 01
          +3
          You can recall the expression

          Initiative is punishable
        2. vorobey
          vorobey 19 July 2012 15: 04
          +2
          Uh Steam engine offended, puffed up. I’m repeating myself. What gets away with a sparrow does not roll at the Falcon.

          If a bird jumped on you, it's money
          (popular sign)
          1. Armata
            Armata 19 July 2012 15: 08
            +3
            Quote: vorobey
            If a bird jumped on you, it's money
            (popular sign)

            They gave me a salary today. smile
            1. vorobey
              vorobey 19 July 2012 15: 16
              +2
              I'm saying that I have useful poop.
              Do you want a joke in the subject?
              1. Armata
                Armata 19 July 2012 15: 19
                +1
                Let's have a great mood
                1. vorobey
                  vorobey 19 July 2012 15: 46
                  +4
                  I tell.

                  Traffic cops are at the post. A Chiroki jeep rushes, they slow it down, and a homeless person from that category who are already familiar in one place, at one time, in general is constantly in front of you, and you already know him as a native. Policeman stunned- You, How? Where did you steal? Quickly out of the car.
                  A bum climbs out. civilly dressed. cologne is not sour, says - My ...
                  Policeman stunned even more- How for what means?
                  B. - I have opened the gift of healing.
                  G.- How is it?
                  B. - My feces are healing.
                  G.- And what are you treating?
                  B. - Yes, little by little.
                  G. - Listen, can you cure my baldness? And I will let you go and I will not slow down, and I will help if Che. He takes off his cap, and there ....
                  B. - a bad case, but let's try ..
                  And after the KPM I’m throwing a bunch, picks up and smears the bald patch with a traffic cop, and tells me not to wash it for another three days.

                  G.- well, come on. come on, pull on a cap on your ears.

                  The car drives off, in the back seat there is a drunken gag and Vasya’s words, I’m probably giving this apartment too.
  22. Stas57
    Stas57 19 July 2012 13: 32
    +2
    The appearance of the Russian T-34 in October 1941g. in the battles of Mtsenskom shocked the German tankers and military leaders. “South of Mtsensk, the 4-I tank division was attacked by Russian tanks, and it had to endure a difficult moment. For the first time, the superiority of the Russian T-34 tanks was sharply manifested. The division suffered significant losses,” German General Heinz Guderian, 2 commander, wrote about this battle. Tank Army Group "Center". The undeniable superiority of the armored forces of the Wehrmacht was questioned.

    the truth there was about 20 KV-1, well, to whom it is now interesting.
  23. Strashila
    Strashila 19 July 2012 13: 44
    +1
    Jumping, flying ... a bad analogy with BT. Here are the statements by the official of the Moscow Region about the termination of the procurement for 5 years, this is only one betrayal. It is actually the destruction of the whole industry and the military branch.
  24. Jeglov
    Jeglov 19 July 2012 14: 01
    -2
    The appearance of the Russian T-34 in October 1941g. in the battles of Mtsenskom shocked the German tankers and military leaders. “South of Mtsensk, the 4-I tank division was attacked by Russian tanks, and it had to endure a difficult moment. For the first time, the superiority of the Russian T-34 tanks was sharply manifested. The division suffered significant losses,” German General Heinz Guderian, 2 commander, wrote about this battle. Tank Army Group "Center". The undeniable superiority of the armored forces of the Wehrmacht was questioned.


    Useful about Mtsensk ...

    “South of Mtsensk, the 4th Panzer Division was attacked by Russian tanks, and it had to endure a difficult moment. For the first time, the superiority of Russian T-34 tanks appeared in sharp form. The division suffered significant losses. The planned rapid attack on Tula had to be postponed for now. ” [37— P.315]

    This horror story about the almighty miracle tanks acquired the most colorful appearance after several word-of-mouth transitions with the addition of curls and bows corresponding to the myth. Anglo-American historical science, without a second thought, picked up a wave of tales of losers about who really prevented them from winning the war. The English historian Alan Clark in his book “The Barbarossa Plan” gave a vivid and juicy picture of events near Mtsensk:

    “On the evening of October 11, when the vanguard of the 4 Panzer Division cautiously entered the flaming suburb of Mtsensk, the division stretched for 15 miles along a narrow road where support artillery and infantry were almost beyond radio communications.

    For Katukov, the time has come to deliver the next blow. The T-34 tanks moved quickly on the ground freezing at dusk, and their wide caterpillars freely carried them where the German T IV got stuck, sitting on armored bottoms. The Russians swiftly and fiercely attacked the German column, breaking it into pieces, which were systematically destroyed. The arrows of the 4th division, whose morale was destroyed during the first clash with Katukov five days earlier, again saw how their shells bounced off the inclined armor of Russian tanks. “There is nothing worse than a tank battle against superior enemy forces. Not in numbers - it was not important for us, we are used to it. But against better cars - it's terrible ... You drive the engine, but it almost does not obey.

    Russian tanks are so agile, at close range they will climb the slope or overcome the swamp faster than you turn the tower. And through the noise and roar you hear the clang of shells on your armor all the time. "When they get into our tank, you often hear a deafening explosion and the roar of burning fuel, too loud, thanks to God so that you can hear the death cries of the crew." The 4th Panzer Division was virtually destroyed, and the defense of Tula received another small respite. But besides a tactical assessment, Guderian made an ominous conclusion: “Up until this point, we had an advantage over tanks. From now on, the situation has reversed. ” [76— S.162-163]

    As befits mythological characters, the T-34 tanks fly without touching the ground, overcome slopes, swamps with lightning speed, sowing death and destruction. Moving faster than turning the tower is pure fiction: on the battlefield, especially on rough terrain, tanks of those years moved at speeds of no more than 10-15 km / h. We also note that in this description the tanks are fighting exclusively with each other, neither infantry nor artillery can be seen. Although in the general case the "columns" were not only made up of tanks, the typical tactics for conducting German military operations was the creation of "battle groups" from parts of the tank, motorized infantry regiments, sappers and artillery. The source material for stories about the battles near Mtsensk was the report of the commander of the 4th Panzer Division, Major General Willibald von Langeman und Erlenkamp, ​​compiled by him in hot pursuit of events. A few quotes: “After the capture of Orel, the Russians first used their heavy tanks in large numbers in several clashes, which led to heavy tank battles, since Russian tanks no longer allowed themselves to be knocked out by artillery fire. For the first time in the eastern campaign, the absolute superiority of the Russian 26-ton and 52-ton tanks over our Pz.Kpfw.III and IV was revealed. "Russian tanks usually used the construction in a semicircle, firing from their 7,62 cm guns from a distance of 1000 meters, throwing out monstrous breakdown energy with high accuracy." [3— P.205] And further: “In addition to better weapons and armor, the 26-ton Christie tank (T-34) is faster, more maneuverable, its turret rotation mechanism is clearly better. [...] In the course of our advance from Glebov to Minsk, we did not find a single Russian tank that failed due to breakdowns. ” [3— P.205]

    It must be said that since the beginning of the Eastern campaign the German tank commanders had many chances to see new Soviet tanks in battle. Langemann was just lucky to some extent - his division did not encounter any large masses of T-34s and KBs. Although many other German tank formations did not escape this doubtful happiness in the very first days of this same "eastern campaign." However, the unforgivable mistakes of Langeman can be traced from the description of the battle. His division met the attack of the Katukovites in the convoy, which was not deployed in battle formations. This could happen only if the division command relaxed and refused to reconnaissance and security. Normally organized reconnaissance in all directions could timely warn a tank column of the approach of Soviet tanks. Given that the column of the tank division is not only and not so much tanks, but artillery and infantry, it was not difficult to organize the defense using adequate anti-tank weapons in the person of 50 mm anti-tank guns, 88 mm anti-aircraft guns and hull guns. But this was not done, which led to the beating of German tanks in a marching column. Naturally, the command of the 4th Panzer Division did not want to admit their mistakes and preferred to blame their miscalculations on the great and terrible equipment of the Russians. Guderian could not help but support Langeman's report, since his immediate subordinate got into an unpleasant story. To admit his mistakes meant to get a spot on his own reputation for mistakes in personnel policy. The circles on the water from the stone once thrown by a German general who had overslept the blow of Soviet tanks diverged very far. In a footnote to the above story about the battle of Mtsensk, Alan Clark writes:

    “Guderian recalled:“ I drew up a report on this situation, which is new to us, and sent it to the army group. In understandable terms, I described the clear advantage of the “T-34” over our “T IV" and made the appropriate conclusions that should have influenced our future tank construction. I concluded with an appeal to immediately send a commission to my front sector, which would consist of representatives of the artillery and technical administration, the ministry of armaments, tank designers and tank manufacturers ... They could examine the wrecked tanks on the battlefield ... and listen to people’s advice who had to ride them, regarding what should be taken into account in the design of new tanks. I also asked to speed up the production of heavy anti-tank guns with sufficient armor-piercing power against the T-34 [author's note: this commission really was very quickly organized and arrived at Guderian’s headquarters on November 20]. " [76— P.163] Demanding a commission on tanks, of course, is easier than sorting out your own mistakes and mistakes. Ironically, exactly one month before that, Guderian literally stated the following: “... the Soviet T-34 tank is a typical example of backward Bolshevik technology. This tank cannot be compared with the best examples of our tanks, made by the faithful sons of the Reich and repeatedly proved their advantage ... “- this is the letter of Heinz Guderian, read and recorded in the protocol record of the meeting of the leadership of the tank forces at Hitler’s headquarters on October 21, 1941 (emphasized by Jeglov) At this meeting, requirements were put forward for the future “panther”. The tank was developed under the influence of clashes with the T-34, which was appreciated, but somehow did without panic reports and calling commissions. Moreover, then G. Guderian was among the “hot goals” that denied the merits of the new Soviet tank. After the war, he chose a simple way - to blame his failures on the tank industry of the Third Reich, which he admired so much in October 1941.
    The first battles with the T-34

    In fact, the first serious clashes with the T-34 and KB occurred in the early days of the war. The only difference was that they passed during normal reconnaissance work and the smooth interaction of German tanks with other branches of the armed forces. Therefore, his colleagues did not allow themselves to make mistakes similar to those made by Langeman, despite the fact that in the early days of the T-34 invasion they were certainly head on. The Germans, of course, had some information about the new Soviet tanks, but rather vague. In April 1941, German intelligence reported the performance characteristics of the new Soviet heavy tank: weight - 46 tons, speed - 35 km / h, weapons - 76 mm gun and three machine guns, 40 mm armor. Manufacturer - Leningrad Tank Plant. At the same time, the data of the T-32 medium tank were published. Weight - 30 tons, speed - 45 km / h, armor - 30 mm, weapons - 45 mm cannon or 76 mm cannon and two machine guns. Manufacturer - Stalingrad Tank Plant. The main blunder was, as we see, in assessing the armor protection of new Red Army combat vehicles.
    1. Stas57
      Stas57 19 July 2012 14: 18
      +2
      Quote: Jeglov
      However, the unforgivable mistakes of Langeman can be traced from the description of the battle. His division met the attack of the Katukovites in the convoy, which was not deployed in battle formations. This could happen only if the division command relaxed and refused to reconnaissance and security. Normally organized reconnaissance in all directions could timely warn a tank column of the approach of Soviet tanks. Given that the column of a tank division is not only and not so much tanks, but artillery and infantry, it was not difficult to organize a defense using adequate anti-tank weapons in the person of 50-mm anti-tank guns, 88-mm anti-aircraft guns and hull guns.

      this is not true

      Quote: Jeglov
      The English historian Alan Clark in his book “The Barbarossa Plan” gave a vivid and juicy picture of the events near Mtsensk:

      “On the evening of October 11, when the vanguard of the 4 Panzer Division cautiously entered the flaming suburb of Mtsensk, the division stretched for 15 miles along a narrow road where support artillery and infantry were almost beyond radio communications.

      and this is nonsense
  25. Internet fighter
    Internet fighter 19 July 2012 14: 06
    +3
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJtAeMVHXiI - Video to cheer up!
    1. vorobey
      vorobey 19 July 2012 14: 29
      +4
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlgkeuEQbg4&feature=related

      And this video is about the benefits of translating the BTT to the wheelbase.
  26. Jeglov
    Jeglov 19 July 2012 14: 36
    +2
    this is not true


    and this is nonsense


    Earnestly!!!!! wassat
    1. Stas57
      Stas57 19 July 2012 14: 44
      0
      Jeglov,
      Well, what to convince if Isaev himself refused this nonsense on a milter another 3 years ago

      in the first part, stupidly in Yandex- mtsensk, katuki, 41
      gives the first result http://www.battlefield.ru/mtsensk-soviet-version/stranitsa-3.html
      Soviet and German versions, based on documents, ours and German, squeak "marching columns" there.
      You can look in Shein's FI, an issue dedicated to the 1st Guards brigade, there is also about "reconnaissance and marching columns"

      on the second nonsense in the same place, but for one, take a look -
      1 when 4 etc. took Mtsensk.
      2. where was xnumx tp at that time
      3that 11go was busy with.
      where he was and what narrow roads he was there and what he dismembered there

      in this part of clarke, every word is complete nonsense.
  27. r.anoshkin
    r.anoshkin 19 July 2012 15: 57
    +1
    The total volume of Russian exports of MBT in the period 2007-2014. estimated at 1291 new cars worth $ 3,858 billion. Russia's main competitors in this field are the United States and Germany. 2011 to 2014 The United States exports 457 Abrams tanks worth $ 4,97 billion, Germany will export 348 Leopards in various modifications worth $ 3,487 billion in the same period (quote). And what about the mathematics? Export prices (simple division) -tank RF-approx. 3 million ye, abrams and leo-approx. 10 million. And where will this dibiloid instead of one Russian three leos buy? And another question in "nowhere" -VVP, what artist are you doing us hard, all by permitted and unlawful methods you transfer to the basins and admit the possibility of purchasing foreign weapons - AVTOVAZ is something dear to you personally? Maybe buy UVZ shares - then you will turn to defense enterprises before?
  28. felixis69
    felixis69 20 July 2012 06: 30
    0
    I don't understand why these show-offs are a "flying tank". For those who have not flown in a tank I will explain: the tanker feels like a beetle in a matchbox, shaken like a rattle. Try to jump on the car !!! Even a small bump is a nuisance. Imagine yourself in the place of a tanker !!! You are in an incomprehensible position, grabbing one hand for ... (I'll call it the handrail), and the other for the lever. To lower the fifth point to the saddle !!!! ???? Aha !!! After landing, you will lose your spine. Such is the circus. In real combat conditions - it's not necessary nafig !!!!! Even close it is not necessary !!!!
  29. Nechai
    Nechai 20 July 2012 09: 09
    0
    Quote: vorobey
    but you must admit that there is no single concept

    Again, mind, let me say, Sayadi? If you find in open access carefully read the works of the Hero of the Soviet Union, Marshal of the armored forces LOSIK Oleg Alexandrovich. Here there you can find both about BMPT and about Katun (implemented by now in Tunguska and Pantsyr variants). And much more interesting ....
    1. vorobey
      vorobey 20 July 2012 12: 44
      +1
      Valera, thanks, but I read the truth fluently without hesitation.
      Is it being introduced?
  30. taksist
    taksist 26 October 2013 16: 17
    0
    The main thing in the tank: Patency, armament and crew. What good is that it can accelerate to 100 km per hour, what good is that it weighs 60 tons (remember the T-34 and the Tiger) ... A combination of all factors is important. Remember
    that guy on the bridge with one gun, one! shot a whole column. Crews need to be trained as cosmonauts, but not as "sledges", then
    and if there are flaws in the machine, they will not be noticeable.
  31. Alexis
    Alexis 11 November 2013 03: 53
    +1
    http://glavcom.blogspot.de/2012/03/90.html
  32. Alexis
    Alexis 11 November 2013 03: 54
    -1
    http://glavcom.blogspot.de/2012/03/90.html