Where else in Russia do tanks of the first series serve? T-72A and T-72AV

T-72A - noticeably lack of hinged protection. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXzpwSAqsqY

The military department has launched a park modernization program tanks T-80BV to the BVM level. As it was announced, the modernized machines are perfect for operation in the harsh winters of the Russian "north". However, there are still places in the Russian Federation where the T-72 tanks of the first series are in service. It's about the Far East and the Urals.

The first T-80BVM battalion of 31 vehicles in 2019 was transferred to the so-called "Arctic" 200th motorized rifle brigade of the Northern fleet... There is no officially certified information about the arrival of the updated tanks in the Far East, only information was passed on the rearmament of a number of parts of the Far Eastern Military District on the T-80BV. At the same time, it was reported about the transfer of the T-80BVM to the Kantemirovsk division near Moscow, which traditionally operated the T-80U. Apparently, the second battalion kit in full force is going to re-equip part of the tank fleet of this particular unit.

The process, as they say, has begun, but the question remains, how far from completion is it? The Russian Defense Ministry has posted footage of the exercises currently taking place in the Far East. Attention was immediately drawn to the T-72AV tanks caught in the photo lens, which were far from being the T-72B3, but even the T-72B. The T-72AV can be easily identified by a number of signs: like the previous version of the T-72A, it has a small headlamp with an IR filter, but at the same time it has dynamic protection.

In combat units, you can also find T-72A tanks. They were "spotted" in 2020 at exercises in the Urals. Here, the T-72A are serving in one of the recently deployed tank regiments and, apparently, were reactivated to equip the new unit with materiel.

T-72AB

Comments

[Old tanker]

No wonder. Old-model tanks are used in combat training groups of units that are used for combat training. This is done to save the service life of later modifications.
UBG is not sent to war. It is now in parts or supernumerary equipment equipped, or to be replaced when bringing to the highest degree of BG.

[carstorm 11]

Plus training centers in which old modifications are also left in excess of the state. T 72 A still does not fit for improvement.

[Lexus]

Modernized tanks are being crushed by "newcomers" at ostentatious biathlons without any significant commercial effect, and their own tankers study and serve in junk. Shame! Those who clap their hands at this need to be recorded in the heroic (posthumous) crew.

[carstorm 11]

This is not a disgrace but a common practice. A tank is an expensive thing, all the more modern. Do you really think someone will let the young for their management? So it was in the Soviet Union. Old stuff was crushed in the training school.

[Lexus]

What kind of tanks in the RF Armed Forces, besides the T-90M, are modern? T-72B3M and T-80BVM are ordinary, slightly dirty tank junk. Change from a Japanese foreign car to a "constipation" tada.

[carstorm 11]

Oh, yes, calm down already in everything that is possible, a versed person eh? Which tank did you finish? I am Good. And the full path from the platoon. Tank junk? OK. Count as you please. Apparently you have operated more advanced machines and know more than me.

[Cer59]

just think, why were they shown ... think ...

[Doliva63]

Quote: carstorm 11

This is not a disgrace but a common practice. A tank is an expensive thing, all the more modern. Do you really think someone will let the young for their management? So it was in the Soviet Union. Old stuff was crushed in the training school.

Cool That is, mechanics for the new T-64/72/80 were taught on the old T-62, or what? For example, there were no old eighties. Well, they made me laugh!

[carstorm 11]

Exactly. After college, it was strange to me, because even there we studied at 80, but in the troops I met in the course practice in the training regiment.

[Doliva63]

Quote: carstorm 11

Exactly. After college, it was strange to me, because even there we studied at 80, but in the troops I met in the course practice in the training regiment.

Well, if you are a tanker, would you take a mechanic drive from a T-80 on your T-62 to your tank? I would never!

[Lexus]

He would have taken ... and before the fight "suddenly" broke.

[carstorm 11]

Don't be the same. Didn't break. And before and after.

[Lexus]

I don’t believe without your usual agitation.

[carstorm 11]

This is your business and the essence of the conversation is not

[Doliva63]

Quote: lexus

He would have taken ... and before the fight "suddenly" broke.

Well, a colleague just didn't answer the question, because the answer is obvious. In the heat of Internet polemics, it is easy to sacrifice professionalism - and pride in the dispute does not suffer, and the rating If it is still possible to take a mechanic drive from the T-62 to the T-72 (there even was an engine similar to that at first), then already on the T-64 with its 5TDA there is no way - everything is different. And even on the T-80 - even more so. Our tank commanders were already ensigns, not conscripts.

[carstorm 11]

First of all, old stuff and rubbish is not necessary 62. Combat machines of past modifications are sometimes even that rubbish. Secondly, t 72 A And t 72 B is 12 years of difference between themselves.

[Lexus]

"It's hard to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if it's not there." (FROM)

During his service in the North Caucasus, he entered the Service of the RAV OGVS. The reason for the use of the T-62 in the 2nd campaign is banal - the arising shortage of HE shells for 2A46M, which were practically not purchased in the 90s, but were very intensively spent, incl. and in the previous war. Soviet reserves were rapidly dwindling. Ammunition for the 115 mm 2A20 was in abundance and in good condition. Taking into account the current, almost piece purchases of artillery shots, I believe that the reason for the retention of the T-62M in units is the same. Enough chatter.

[carstorm 11]

The T 62 was removed from service in 11 and is not a regular unit. All the available technology of this sample is in storage. And really, stop talking.

[Aleks tv]

Quote: lexus

"It's hard to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if it's not there." (FROM)

During his service in the North Caucasus, he entered the Service of the RAV OGVS. The reason for the use of the T-62 in the 2nd campaign is banal - the arising shortage of HE shells for the 2A46M, which were practically not purchased in the 90s, but were very intensively spent, incl. and in the previous war. Soviet reserves were rapidly dwindling. Ammunition for the 115 mm 2A20 was in abundance and in good condition. Taking into account the current, almost piece purchases of artillery shots, I believe that the reason for the retention of the T-62M in units is the same.

Hello, Alexey.

Although he had no relation to the RAV Service, he would not have been so categorical.
All 5 business trips ...

Yes, the PF was the main BP in the Caucasus.
Yes, there were problems with them, but there were problems ... finally with ALL supplies. So you can agree that we, swallowed that kind of tushnya, ate it all on the European part of the country)).

The recruiting of prefabricated regiments in the districts was of course "rabble", but they took OWN equipment that was in the state.
On the T-62, Budanovtsy came to the second company from my beloved ZabVO (160th), this tank was an element of the national dress of the troops of Eastern Siberia and the Far East.
Plus the explosives used it, the 93rd regiment, if I am not mistaken, was staffed with them.
Whom you forgot, call ...
And most of them were on T-72s, so they spent a lot, radishes like
...
If they are in service now?
Officially no.
In Europe, the 42nd used them the longest, but they have already passed. Although I would not be surprised if in the Far East, for example, the marines will roll them out of the boxes or former PULAD members. This is normal, they still have, aphids, all on a leftover principle ...

Basically, T-62 on the CBRT or BHVT.
And it is right. Let the kemar.
...
At "Vostok-2018" they were removed from storage for those assigned. There, MANY tasks were worked out except for "mirdruzhbajvachka" with China. Mob. the deployment has not been canceled, although after the broom the stools ... it was like a pathetic breed for the Mob. deployment of the USSR ...
Eheh.
But that is another topic.
Even got carried away))

[Doliva63]

Quote: carstorm 11

First of all, old stuff and rubbish is not necessary 62. Combat machines of past modifications are sometimes even that rubbish. Secondly, t 72 A And t 72 B is 12 years of difference between themselves.

I'm talking about the 80s, have you noticed? Was there a lot of junk and junk among the T-83s in '72? Yes, those that were in the BUP were different from those that UVZ brought us in 84 or 85, but not so radically as to retrain. In any case, the curriculum has changed. I don’t understand at all, what are we arguing about? Do you agree that a fighter should learn from the technique on which he should fight? I think yes. And this is without options.

[carstorm 11]

Yes, I do not argue) think as you like)

[Doliva63]

Quote: carstorm 11

Yes, I do not argue) think as you like)

I like it this way -

[carstorm 11]

Once my dad took me to the training ground. I was small and I don’t remember a year, but then such Vietnamese sesame bars were sold like kazinak) Anastasyevka near Khabarovsk, a training regiment, I personally shot from 55) my father allowed. Moreover, his staff was 72) at night the flamethrowers were still firing, you know from which machines. I mean that teaching me, let's say, in Blagoev, was at 80y. And somehow I only dealt with this machine in life) but a lot of people were in parts with other machines and somehow served)

[Doliva63]

Quote: carstorm 11

Once my dad took me to the training ground. I was small and I don’t remember a year, but then such Vietnamese sesame bars were sold like kazinak) Anastasyevka near Khabarovsk, a training regiment, I personally shot from 55) my father allowed. Moreover, his staff was 72) at night the flamethrowers were still firing, you know from which machines. I mean that teaching me, let's say, in Blagoev, was at 80y. And somehow I only dealt with this machine in life) but a lot of people were in parts with other machines and somehow served)

The SA was a state within a state, and it was huge. And the more, the larger the oncoming error. Therefore, I agree that in some places it could not be quite the same as everywhere And then, at the school you studied not only the T-80, but the entire line that was in service, so "retraining" for a non-core machine is a couple of trifles, agree Another thing is the personnel.

[Old tanker]

Eighty olds were full. Both old in terms of resource and modification. But on all, except for the T-80U, there was the same weapons control complex and vehicle controls. So this did not affect the training of the crews. The same is with the T-72 and T-64 modifications. In the zero years, to preserve the resource of the T-80BV in the UBG for the training of gunners and commanders, supernumerary T-64Bs were introduced. They have one-to-one caps, except for the ZPU. And they put the T-64B on the TOG. A very smart decision. And the main thing is not to wear out the cops of the combat group at the TOG. A very smart decision.

[Doliva63]

Quote: Old Tanker

Eighty olds were full. Both old in terms of resource and modification. But on all, except for the T-80U, there was the same weapons control complex and vehicle controls. So this did not affect the training of the crews. The same is with the T-72 and T-64 modifications. In the zero years, to preserve the resource of the T-80BV in the UBG for the training of gunners and commanders, supernumerary T-64Bs were introduced. They have one-to-one caps, except for the ZPU. And they put the T-64B on the TOG. A very smart decision. And the main thing is not to wear out the cops of the combat group at the TOG. A very smart decision.

Was the 80s full of old 80s? Also decided to make you laugh? Evening of jokes I don’t argue about the 90s - there was no normal army already in the early XNUMXs. I will repeat myself - in the USSR army, they taught in the training using the equipment on which they were to serve.

[Lexus]

Which was absolutely correct. And even a promising technique was available in matbase.

[carstorm 11]

What kind of matbaza?) MTO?)

[Quadro]

Quote: lexus

Modernized tanks are being crushed by "newcomers" at ostentatious biathlons without any significant commercial effect, and their own tankers study and serve in junk. Shame! Those who clap their hands at this need to be recorded in the heroic (posthumous) crew.

Hey, no shame, then why the same Hungary buys 2a4 leopards for training and 2a7 as a base? That is, Europeans have not yet bought money for money, but here consider it a gift - a disgrace?

[Lexus]

2A4 are mostly purchased for spare parts. And what can be put from T-62 to T-80?

[Aleks tv]

... Old-model tanks are used in combat training groups

Good day.

I don't see the name from the phone in the PM, it's extremely inconvenient ..

...
There is such, aha.
If the engine is at least a B-46-6 and a TPD-K1 sight, why not?
It’s quite reasonable.

And at Vostok-2018 and T-62M they had fun.
By the way, the partisans assigned to them could undress the conscripts on the T-72, either at the tank training center or at the tank director. The thread (column) was carried out without stretching the "elastic".
What can you take from them - BISONS, aphids ...))

.......
I don’t understand, what’s wrong with the tower illuminator?
He stood ON ALL T-72 models. And the T-90 is ...
I suppose that even when a TVN-10 gas-discharge panel or another thermal imaging Hrendelpupel for driving appears near the mech.water, it will still stand.
Very convenient - for everyday use, even as a headlight without an IR lens.
It goes to the appendage of two illuminators on the body, one of which is also with an IR filter.

[Old tanker]

On the T-80, the usual FG-126 headlight with a transparent lens is installed in this place. On the march through mud and snow - that's it! The front ones are quickly clogged and there is no sense from them.

[Aleks tv]

... On the march through mud and snow - that's it!

Ага.
Here I am about the same - very convenient for everyday service.

[carstorm 11]

In the East, 62 were removed from storage and specially sent. We checked the system itself. These were not combat vehicles. After as far as I know, they were loaded and sent to Syria.

[alex neym_2]

In a tank battalion, out of all the tanks on the staff schedule, the commander, together with the deputy engineer, selects the vehicle that has developed the MAXIMUM engine life and receives the status of a "training tank" on which all personnel undergo training. Having worked out the service life of the tank, it goes for overhaul - so the training does not take place on "junk"!

[Naz]

And how much was cut in the restructuring of technology? How much good is gone.

[evgen1221]

Where else do tanks of the first series serve? Yes, everywhere nafig! Do not give the T90 to the first year vodyatlu!

[venik]

Quote: evgen1221

Where else do tanks of the first series serve? Yes, everywhere nafig! Do not give the T90 to the first year vodyatlu!

=======
For a long time already, in the early 2000s, I came to visit an old friend. Let's go mushrooming ... And there is a tank range and a highway skirting around the "perimeter". And it so happened that in one place, right next to the highway (10-20 meters away, there was a bumpy dirt road on which they jumped ..... T-54 (not T-55, namely T-54!). I then amazed: "Is this junk still preserved in the troops? Well these are "rarities", museum exhibits! "... My friend then only grinned: "So there and then a big" training ". Well, not on the" 90s "green boys to teach driving!

[Doliva63]

Quote: venik

Quote: evgen1221

Where else do tanks of the first series serve? Yes, everywhere nafig! Do not give the T90 to the first year vodyatlu!

=======
For a long time already, in the early 2000s, I came to visit an old friend. Let's go mushrooming ... And there is a tank range and a highway skirting around the "perimeter". And it so happened that in one place, right next to the highway (10-20 meters away, there was a bumpy dirt road on which they jumped ..... T-54 (not T-55, namely T-54!). I then amazed: "Is this junk still preserved in the troops? Well these are "rarities", museum exhibits! "... My friend then only grinned: "So there and then a big" training ". Well, not on the" 90s "green boys to teach driving!

I do not believe. Then this mechanic drive comes to the troops, and there - everything else - the engine, transmission, etc. Who needs this mechanic drive? He doesn't know anything at all! Therefore, back in the 80s, in the Elanskaya training course, for example, cadets-tankers were quite capable of driving the T-80, and the infantry - on the then modern BMP-2. No one will put the T-54 trained on the T-90 - these are completely different machines, and the mechanized drive will have to be retrained in the troops for another half-year, but this is not in the combat training program - who will be the last one? So I came to the shipment, I look at the Criminal Procedure Code of the fighters, and there - rarities. And I have eighties. I turned around and went "home". As a result, incomplete set. Who needs it? Therefore, they always cooked on the technique on which they had to serve. Fantastic! The only exception was the BMP mechanics, they, yes, studied on the old BMP-1, tk. there was no difference in engine and transmission.

[venik]

Quote: Doliva63

Therefore, back in the 80s, in the Elan study, for example, tank cadets quite myself drove the T-80

======
Excuse me, are not the keywords "cadets-tankers "?
The fact is that in the distant 80th year I got to the training camp (exactly in front of the Army), and although the specialty was "radio engineering", some imbicile came up with a "brilliant idea" to teach us how to drive, and not only on " uazikah "and" sheshikah "(this can still be understood!), but also on armored vehicles .... But this is absolutely impossible to understand .... And do you know WHAT they brought us as" armored vehicles "? Believe it or not: BTR-152V1 (!!!!). These 2 troughs were older than me (and my comrades "in misfortune"). And where were they dug up?
PS By the way, "trips" on these "rarities", broken "into a snipe," became absolutely unforgettable an experience that will last a lifetime! Lord, what did I never drive afterwards! BUT (!) If you have mastered the "broken-down" BTR-152 .... So you can drive EVERYTHING (that moves)!

[Doliva63]

Quote: venik

Quote: Doliva63

Therefore, back in the 80s, in the Elan study, for example, tank cadets quite myself drove the T-80

======
Excuse me, are not the keywords "cadets-tankers "?
The fact is that in the distant 80th year I got to the training camp (exactly in front of the Army), and although the specialty was "radio engineering", some imbicile came up with a "brilliant idea" to teach us how to drive, and not only on " uazikah "and" sheshikah "(this can still be understood!), but also on armored vehicles .... But this is absolutely impossible to understand .... And do you know WHAT they brought us as" armored vehicles "? Believe it or not: BTR-152V1 (!!!!). These 2 troughs were older than me (and my comrades "in misfortune"). And where were they dug up?
PS By the way, "trips" on these "rarities", broken "into a snipe," became absolutely unforgettable an experience that will last a lifetime! Lord, what did I never drive afterwards! BUT (!) If you have mastered the "broken-down" BTR-152 .... So you can drive EVERYTHING (that moves)!

Well, we talked about tankers. And I love the BTR-152 since childhood - I rode it

[venik]

Quote: Doliva63

And I love the BTR-152 since childhood - I rode it laughing

=====
In! THE MACHINE IS A BEAST !!! We really got the "apparatus" that was thoroughly gouged by more than one generation of gouges, and it was clearly not repaired with our hands, but with some other body parts (perhaps the very ones that the Ukrainian president and his comrades used to play the piano ) ..... In short: absolutely everything that is possible and what is not "stuck" there! Moreover, the track passed through a forest and was very winding. (a kind of "serpentine") .... Further you can imagine !!!

[Doliva63]

Quote: venik

Quote: Doliva63

And I love the BTR-152 since childhood - I rode it laughing

=====
In! THE MACHINE IS A BEAST !!! We really got the "apparatus" that was thoroughly gouged by more than one generation of gouges, and it was clearly not repaired with our hands, but with some other body parts (perhaps the very ones that the Ukrainian president and his comrades used to play the piano ) ..... In short: absolutely everything that is possible and what is not "stuck" there! Moreover, the track passed through a forest and was very winding. (a kind of "serpentine") .... Further you can imagine !!!

No, in the 60s they drove me on quite serviceable ones, so I can't evaluate But I know very well how to "shake" any combat vehicle, and even more so such a well-deserved old man I somehow drove the Ural with a trailer through the Oberhof Pass (those mountains, of course, but still) - it didn't even have brakes. Nothing, got there, even lost a little weight Well, it's not for nothing that there is a saying: the army is the school of life. Gives - to whom that, but everyone will remember for a long time!

[venik]

Quote: Doliva63

I somehow drove the Ural with a trailer through the Oberhof Pass

=======
Did they serve in the Western Group, my friend? Wal with a trailer and no brakes? This is really COOL!
Himself once had a chance to drive a UAZ "loaf" of 30 kilometers without brakes and then drive through half of Taganrog .... At first it was dumb, and then nothing - even "got used to" .... But that "loaf", and then - "Ural", and even with a trailer, and even on the slopes ...
Yes, the Army is such a thing! Why not see enough and get used to it! A memory for life!

[Doliva63]

Quote: venik

Quote: Doliva63

I somehow drove the Ural with a trailer through the Oberhof Pass

=======
Did they serve in the Western Group, my friend? Wal with a trailer and no brakes? This is really COOL!
Himself once had a chance to drive a UAZ "loaf" of 30 kilometers without brakes and then drive through half of Taganrog .... At first it was dumb, and then nothing - even "got used to" .... But that "loaf", and then - "Ural", and even with a trailer, and even on the slopes ...
Yes, the Army is such a thing! Why not see enough and get used to it! A memory for life!

This "zgv" makes me sick, but I served in the GSVG, yes Memories of serving in the army are sweeter than those of children, although my childhood in the army has passed.

[Old tanker]

It is quite possible that the T-54 was not trained tank driver mechanics, but BTS-4 tractors or engineering vehicles based on it. The controls are the same. So for initial training, it will work.

[Doliva63]

Quote: Old Tanker

It is quite possible that the T-54 was not trained tank driver mechanics, but BTS-4 tractors or engineering vehicles based on it. The controls are the same. So for initial training, it will work.

But then they talked about the T-90, did you notice? And so I agree with you, of course.

[Old tanker]

Actually, the topic is about the T-72.

[venik]

Quote: Old Tankman

It is quite possible that the T-54 was not trained tank driver mechanics, but BTS-4 tractors or engineering vehicles based on it. The controls are the same. So for initial training, it will work.

========
Quite possible! Although the comrade seemed to say that there was a tank training there ... But God knows him (we are both not tankers - we had another specialty). My "deep knowledge" was enough only to distinguish the T-54 from the T-55 .....
And so, in the tank (T-72) I visited only once - "on an excursion", which was arranged by our neighbors in the officer's "hostel" (we had a tank company in our unit - T-72) .... Lord! And as soon as you tankers are placed THERE? Me so with great work shoved into the gunner's place! What a crowded place!

[Old tanker]

Even I am a professional tanker, outwardly, I cannot distinguish the T-54A / B from the T-55. The only difference is that the T-55 has anti-nuclear protection.
Before the T-54A, there was no receiver on the T-54 barrel. Well, on the first models, they are trapped on the tower.

[venik]

Quote: Old Tankman

Up to T-54A on the T-54 barrel there was no receiver... Well, on the first models, they are trapped on the tower.

========
It was on these two grounds that I determined it. Only such tricky words as "receiver" and "zaman" do not know!

[Old tanker]

The receiver is a cylindrical bulge on the barrel, hollow inside. Serves to remove powder gases from the bore. Zaman is the bending of the bottom of the tower at an angle.

[HateHouse2]

It's called an ejector, no?
The receiver is a hollow cylinder for reducing the pulsation of gases and their accumulation.

[Old tanker]

The ejector consists of a receiver (a hollow cylinder put on the barrel) with a fastening device and nozzles in the svol wall.

[Dmitry Makarov]

During the war, obsolete and captured equipment was also sent to training units.

[Dikson]

This is quite normal .. In our unit, the foreman for earthwork gave the soldiers small sapper shovels with a double-headed eagle and the date stamped out - 1914))) And you know, nothing, - such blades were normal .. a little heavier than Soviet ones .. such grasping .. There should be nothing idle in the army ..

[Doliva63]

Quote: Dikson

This is quite normal .. In our unit, the foreman for earthwork gave the soldiers small sapper shovels with a double-headed eagle and the date stamped out - 1914))) And you know, nothing, - such blades were normal .. a little heavier than Soviet ones .. such grasping .. There should be nothing idle in the army ..

Somewhere in the vicinity of Borzi I saw "hedgehogs" at the checkpoint, made of rails with an inscription like Siberian factories of Stroganov, 1890 some year. Stunned. Although the tight-fistedness of your foreman also commands respect

[Sands Careers General]

The usual thing.
Should a raw conscript be entrusted to Armat right away?
Let him ride such.

[Old tanker]

Armata and immediately. But only after the simulator. And those cars that are now riding in military trials and parades will probably go to training. It has always been that way.

[moreman78]

The first T-80BVM battalion, consisting of 31 vehicles, was transferred to the so-called "Arctic" 2019th motorized rifle brigade in 200

And nothing that the staff of the battalion is 41 tanks?

[shahor]

Quote: moreman78

the staff of the battalion is 41 tanks?

And what, there are 4 companies in it? We had 1976 companies in the MRP of the tank division -3 ...

[Old tanker]

I had a battalion at Serdyukov in the osmbr of 4 companies. Then, under Shoigu, it was converted into a 3-company 13 tanks of 4 in a platoon. By the way, I began to serve in a separate tank company of a motorized gun regiment of a tank division. So in our company there were 13 tanks, 4 in a platoon. And there are only 2 motorized rifle battalions in the field.
By the way, in the standard states of motorized rifle regiments of motorized rifle divisions of the SA, there were 40 tanks in tank battalions. 3 companies of 13 and a battalion commander. And in motorized rifle brigades there are tank battalions of 5 company composition, but 10 tanks per company.

[Old tanker]

What wonderful states I have not seen in my service.

[Doliva63]

Quote: Old Tanker

What wonderful states I have not seen in my service.

Yeah. A separate TR in SME TD surprised me very much.

[Old tanker]

Why? Fine. I was more surprised by the regiment's two-battalion squadron.
And in a motorized rifle division, there were tank regiments without motorized rifle battalions and even a company. That is, no infantry at all.
And the tb msp is not 40 tanks, but 31, as in tp.

[Doliva63]

Quote: Old Tanker

Why? Fine. I was more surprised by the regiment's two-battalion squadron.
And in a motorized rifle division, there were tank regiments without motorized rifle battalions and even a company. That is, no infantry at all.
And the tb msp is not 40 tanks, but 31, as in tp.

Well, this is, apparently, in the post-Soviet period, because I have not met such perversions. And a separate tank company. What surprised me. A separate company is usually the privilege of a division (a company of "chemists", for example) or an army (ORR SPN, for example) and not a regiment. You and I, apparently, not only served at different times, but also in different armies. You wouldn't call the regimental reconnaissance company a separate one?

[Ngauro]

the main problem of large armies is the high cost of modernization. China is the most obvious example of this.

[moreman78]

Quote: Old Tanker

Why? Fine. I was more surprised by the regiment's two-battalion squadron.
And in a motorized rifle division, there were tank regiments without motorized rifle battalions and even a company. That is, no infantry at all.
And the tb msp is not 40 tanks, but 31, as in tp.

In general, for the SA (until 1990) this is a normal state - tank regiments of motorized rifle divisions did not have motorized rifle battalions.