Military Review

"The most popular main battle tank in the world": the cost of the T-90 was estimated in Vietnam

33

High popularity of Russian tanks The T-90 is also provided at the expense of a much lower price in comparison with other advanced MBT models offered on the world market.


The first place in terms of cost, as indicated by the Vietnamese publication KienThuc, no longer belongs to the French main battle tank AMX 56 Leclerc: the "podium" is now occupied by the newest Japanese Type 90. This "unique tank with the ability to change the center of gravity" will cost the buyer up to 9,4 million $ per unit.

In second place is the representative of Korea - K-2 Black Panther, designed and developed by the country independently.

The AMX 56 Leclerc, once considered the most expensive in the world, dropped to third place. Thanks to the improved production line, the Leclerc cost is reduced. In total, 862 units were produced on it at an average price of $ 8,5 million each.

British Challenger 2, positioned as the "safest" tank in the world, is offered for $ 6,8 million. The German Leopard 2A6, one of the most advanced versions of the base Leopard, currently costs $ 6,7 million. The American M700 Abrams tank will cost $ 000 less.

The only MBT in the world capable of carrying troops is the Israeli Merkava Mk IV, each of which costs $ 5 million. Tank "futuristic design" T-14 "Armata", the most modern MBT in Russia, costs only $ 3,7 million. The Chinese Type 99, massively purchased by the PLA (about 500 vehicles arrived), costs $ 2,6 million.

The T-90S tank, which, among others, is owned by Vietnam, is by far the most popular MBT in the world, and costs $ 2,5 million. The T-72 tank, priced at only $ 1,5 million, is still considered the cheapest modern MBT in the world. Even the Russian military continues to use them as the main [strike] force due to their cost

- notes KienThuc.
33 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Victor_B
    Victor_B 12 October 2020 05: 34
    27
    The T-90S tank, owned by Vietnam, among others, is by far the most popular MBT in the world, and costs $ 2,5 million.
    Cheap doesn't mean worse!
    "The podium" is now occupied by the newest Japanese Type 90. This "unique tank with the ability to change the center of gravity" will cost the buyer up to $ 9,4 million per unit.
    for such grandmas you can buy four T-90s.
    Already four of us, for any one you can score.
    (Thinking ...)
    To score four times!
    1. Graz
      Graz 12 October 2020 06: 36
      +3
      there most likely the price of electronics that we do not have or which we have worse gives the basic cost
      1. Bersaglieri
        Bersaglieri 12 October 2020 11: 54
        13
        And the price of the "working hour" of an employee of the enterprise that manufactures the tank. If the salary of a Japanese or French worker is several times higher than at UVZ, then the cost of the product will also be higher.
    2. Mountain shooter
      Mountain shooter 12 October 2020 06: 49
      +8
      Quote: Victor_B
      for such grandmas you can buy four T-90s.
      Already four of us, for any one you can score.
      (Thinking ...)
      To score four times!

      The tank is a weapon. And the weapon must be reliable, reliable, and again reliable. Inexpensive and powerful enough. And there must be a LOT of it. Well, at least enough. Crews need to be taught. A lot of. Then the "cheap tank" will be no less deadly than the expensive one ... something tells me that the cost of an hour of operation of the "cheap" tank will also be cheaper ... laughing
      1. Observer2014
        Observer2014 12 October 2020 07: 15
        +5
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        Quote: Victor_B
        for such grandmas you can buy four T-90s.
        Already four of us, for any one you can score.
        (Thinking ...)
        To score four times!

        The tank is a weapon. And the weapon must be reliable, reliable, and again reliable. Inexpensive and powerful enough. And there must be a LOT of it. Well, at least enough. Crews need to be taught. A lot of. Then the "cheap tank" will be no less deadly than the expensive one ... something tells me that the cost of an hour of operation of the "cheap" tank will also be cheaper ... laughing

        Well, in the morning you were drawn to philosophy. It feels like the weekend was not in vain. laughing Especially about your cheap tank, I liked it Weapons must first of all be effective and meet the realities of modern combat, for there is zero sense from an expensive and cheap if the weapon does not meet modern challenges.
        1. Mountain shooter
          Mountain shooter 12 October 2020 08: 10
          12
          Quote: Observer2014
          Weapons must first of all be effective and meet the realities of modern combat.

          The experience of using tanks in massive battles (the "Doomsday" war, for example) just says that if the tankers are not properly trained and poorly motivated, there is not much sense from the technology ... And vice versa.
          The T-34 was much inferior (the T-34-76 is very) ... The German "menagerie", if you look at the performance characteristics, but there were MORE of them, and they were GOOD ENOUGH to break the back of the Nazi army. It is also important that our tanks were CHEAPER, less labor-consuming ...
        2. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 12 October 2020 12: 51
          +5
          Quote: Observer2014
          Weapons must first of all be effective and meet the realities of modern combat.

          That's for sure. What is the use of reliability alone, if the equipment is burned by the enemy, since his weapon turned out to be more effective (it will detect it earlier, shoot it further, etc.),
    3. Letun
      Letun 12 October 2020 14: 29
      -5
      Quote: Victor_B
      Cheap doesn't mean worse!

      Said Victor_B closing the door of his Lada Kalina laughing
  2. Jacket in stock
    Jacket in stock 12 October 2020 05: 48
    +9
    Cheap doesn't mean worse.
    Expensive is not necessarily better.
    In general, a tank is just a weapon, a tool in the hands of people.
    Much more depends on the skill of the crew and the literacy of the commanders than on the thickness of the armor, the power of the cannon, and sophisticated electronics.
    What we see is clear confirmation right now in Karabakh. Armenian tanks without camouflage, without air defense cover, became just targets. As, however, and the Azerbaijani in the minefield.
    1. Simargl
      Simargl 12 October 2020 06: 48
      +1
      Quote: Jacket in stock
      Much more depends on the skill of the crew and the literacy of the commanders than on the thickness of the armor, the power of the cannon, and sophisticated electronics.
      So it is so, but to rely on one skill is to hope for bad or insufficient at the enemy. It is not right.
    2. Hypertension
      Hypertension 12 October 2020 15: 16
      +2
      Quote: Jacket in stock
      Cheap doesn't mean worse.
      Expensive is not necessarily better.
      In general, a tank is just a weapon, a tool in the hands of people.

      To some extent. Even the most trained crew on the T-34 cannot handle a mediocre crew on the T-90. This is how I compared it, for contrast, but the meaning, I hope, is clear. Everything must match: both the tank and the crew. Although the trend is towards the fact that the crew (who does not necessarily sit in the tank itself) just press a button. Electronics does the rest.
  3. Holsten
    Holsten 12 October 2020 06: 07
    +5
    It is a pity that three Russian teams, T-72, T-90 and T-14, do not participate in the "Tank Range".
    1. Eugene-Eugene
      12 October 2020 06: 08
      15
      It is a pity that all those listed in the material do not participate.
  4. BARKAS
    BARKAS 12 October 2020 06: 23
    +7
    The main thing is not to regret the funds for training the crews that are comparable to the cost of the tank itself, otherwise there will not be much sense in buying such equipment.
  5. Vasyan1971
    Vasyan1971 12 October 2020 07: 06
    +1
    The only MBT in the world capable of carrying troops is the Israeli Merkava Mk IV

    Yes?
  6. Cruorvult
    Cruorvult 12 October 2020 08: 15
    +3
    As far as I remember, k-1 was developed with the Germans and only recently announced that they switched to domestic units for k-2. So not independently, but "independently".
    1. Constanty
      Constanty 12 October 2020 10: 09
      +2
      The K1 Rokit was a product of the American company Chrysler Defense, from which documentation and instruments were purchased, although the engine and transmission were in fact German. The K2 is already its own Korean project, initially also with a German powertrain, gradually replaced by a Korean doosan engine and transmission.
  7. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 12 October 2020 08: 20
    +2
    With Western tanks ... and already with Chinese ones, the T90M must be compared ... both in price and in characteristics
  8. Yrec
    Yrec 12 October 2020 08: 53
    14
    The "safety" of the Challenger2 is ensured, apparently, by the fact that it does not leave the British Isles. wassat
    1. Megatron
      Megatron 12 October 2020 12: 59
      0
      And storage bases hi
  9. Roman070280
    Roman070280 12 October 2020 09: 20
    0
    It's really funny to read about Armata ..
    What's the point in comparing the price of something that is not produced or sold.
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 12 October 2020 09: 27
      -9
      T-90 tanks also make no sense to compare ... no panorama, no air conditioner, old-style OMS. Electronics are more expensive than mechanical parts.
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 12 October 2020 13: 01
        +4
        Quote: Zaurbek
        T-90 tanks also make no sense to compare ... no panorama, no air conditioner, old-style OMS.

        The complete set of the tank depends on the customer, the plant for the installation of all of the above has (starting from a remotely controlled machine-gun mount and a panorama of the commander, ending with different DZ and KAZ)
    2. vik669
      vik669 13 October 2020 17: 59
      0
      Yes, here many "tankers" from the couch are ridiculous to read with their arguments that where when at what price for what salary, etc. and so on!
  10. Antidote
    Antidote 12 October 2020 09: 39
    +1
    Where did you get the cost of t14?
  11. Knell wardenheart
    Knell wardenheart 12 October 2020 11: 55
    +4
    Both Abrams and Merkava are, of course, very specific products, based on the peculiarities of the doctrine of application and the complex of means to a greater extent than on a balanced complex of performance characteristics.
    Japanese and Korean tanks ... a typical example of super-expensive technology, which has not yet shown itself especially and does not operate on the wide experience of combat operation of the earlier representatives of this school.
    French / British - in my opinion, they offer not technologically new and qualitatively not dominating products in the price segment.
    So, in general, we are competing with the Germans and Chinese for the most part.
  12. Megatron
    Megatron 12 October 2020 12: 58
    +1
    Merkava does not seem to be sold for export ....?
  13. forester1971
    forester1971 12 October 2020 14: 58
    +2
    A question to those who know - why does the tank have a variable center of gravity, which is indicated in the article in the description of the most expensive Japanese tank? And how does this affect combat performance?
    1. Captain Pushkin
      Captain Pushkin 12 October 2020 17: 04
      +1
      Quote: Forester1971
      A question to those who know - why does the tank have a variable center of gravity, which is indicated in the article in the description of the most expensive Japanese tank? And how does this affect combat performance?

      What if the adversary wants to turn him upside down with caterpillars? The enemy will approach to the right, and the tank will move the center of gravity to the right and there will be some enemies. Approaches to the left, and the tank to the left will move the center of gravity ...
      I don't see any other options ...
      1. tank64rus
        tank64rus 13 October 2020 09: 50
        +1
        This was copied from the South Korean K-2, when it sits on the front rollers and raises the barrel of the gun upward, thereby increasing the hinged firing range. The second option is driving on slopes - increasing the possibility of an angle of movement along the slope. All this is in the public domain.
    2. Ded_Mazay
      Ded_Mazay 13 October 2020 17: 51
      0
      Quote: Forester1971
      variable center of gravity
      - don't worry, it's the author's balls for the rollers. It is all about the suspension with variable ground clearance and body tilt. A very useful thing when there is a lack of an UVN weapon. Only it is expensive and reliability raises questions.
  14. Sancho_SP
    Sancho_SP 12 October 2020 15: 22
    -1
    I guess the question is more about the trade margin.

    If you look where, besides your own army, these expensive tanks are sold, then there will be no market, only politics.

    Russia, as usual, distributes weapons for free. The West makes you pay exorbitant prices.
  15. Radikal
    Radikal 13 October 2020 21: 35
    0
    The high popularity of the Russian T-90 tanks is also ensured by a much lower price in comparison with other advanced MBT models offered on the world market.
    That's right, popularity - with "them", and with us? How many are there in the Russian troops? sad