Military Review

American observer appreciated the survivability and combat effectiveness of the T-90M tank

48

The Russian-made T-90M Proryv tank is an improved version of the Soviet tank T-90. After the modernization, he turned into a real "deadly monster". So the American columnist Mark Episkopos praised the survivability and combat effectiveness of the Russian T-90M tank in an article published by The National Interest.


The author notes that the Soviet predecessor of the "Breakthrough" by the beginning of the 90s met the latest requirements for armored vehicles. Compared to it, the Russian T-90M has an updated turret and an upgraded engine, featuring a more optimal power-to-weight ratio. In addition, the combat vehicle is equipped with a modern and efficient Kalina fire control system.

The journalist also praised the new protection system of the Relikt ERA tank, which makes it less vulnerable to certain types of ammunition, including anti-tank guided missiles. He notes that the protection of the T-90M in comparison with the previous version has increased by almost one and a half times. How the American journalist came to precisely such indicators is not reported.

The T-90M is noticeably faster, more deadly and more tenacious than its predecessors.

- concludes the observer from the United States.

Earlier, The National Interest noted that due to its characteristics, the T-90M has excellent export prospects. At the same time, no comparisons with the new versions of the American Abrams followed. We will remind that earlier in the United States thought about reducing the number of tank units in the army. In particular, a reform of the Marine Corps is being carried out to withdraw tank formations from its composition. But now the United States is again talking about the fact that the number of tanks should be increased.
Photos used:
Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
48 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. UVB
    UVB 3 March 2021 09: 29
    +6
    Question to the tankers, what are these things?
    1. nnm
      nnm 3 March 2021 09: 42
      +25
      For some reason, I remembered an anecdote about the forgotten bucket on the rocket discovered by the general during the check:
      -What is it?!
      - Synchrophasotron!
      - I myself see that the synchrophasotron, I ask why it is not painted !!!! ??
      1. Artunis
        Artunis 3 March 2021 13: 00
        +4
        According to another version, it was an "ion trap"!
    2. Alexilyin
      Alexilyin 3 March 2021 09: 43
      +25
      Built-in equipment for self-digging and installation of various tank trawls. For the first time, they introduced on the T-64 tank. (For domestic tanks)
    3. Insurgent
      Insurgent 3 March 2021 09: 44
      +21
      Quote: UVB
      Question to the tankers, what are these things?

      Not a tanker, a "mabuta" in the not-too-distant past, and probably in the not-so-distant future, but I will express my opinion that it is obvious that these are the elements of fastening a tank trawl.

    4. Konnick
      Konnick 3 March 2021 09: 49
      +4
      Threaded plow stops for self-digging ... in my opinion.
    5. Wedmak
      Wedmak 3 March 2021 10: 37
      +7
      These are the places for attaching additional equipment. An electromagnetic mine sweep for example.
    6. Thrifty
      Thrifty 3 March 2021 11: 47
      +4
      UVB - there you can attach attachments such as an anti-mine trawl, blade, for self-digging. .. hi
  2. Doccor18
    Doccor18 3 March 2021 09: 31
    +9
    Americans praise our weapons ...
    What's the catch?
    Or - let it be better to modernize the T-72/90 than build the Armata ...
    Or - the Russians have a lot of tanks, give us a lot of money ...
    1. Zoer
      Zoer 3 March 2021 09: 41
      +5
      One might think that praise increases combat power. They simply objectively assess a potential adversary. What our chap throwers really lack.
    2. Analkara
      Analkara 3 March 2021 10: 49
      -9
      Why are we grumbling? Splurge on Armata and see what kind of American magazine it is. lol
    3. Constanty
      Constanty 3 March 2021 11: 30
      +5
      It should be borne in mind that the National Interest is not an American, but rather an American-language portal - actually controlled by Russia.

      He has two tasks: one is to show the American public opinion the strength of Russia, the other is to show the Russians how well Americans feel about Russian weapons, which will further raise its prestige and appreciation in Russia itself.
      Cleverly conceived hi
      1. Nikolay73
        Nikolay73 3 March 2021 12: 23
        +4
        Can I look at the firewood?
        1. Yuriy71
          Yuriy71 3 March 2021 14: 57
          +1
          They are, "... from the forest, of course! Father, do you hear, he chops, and I / he - take away / zit ...")))
      2. tikhonov66
        tikhonov66 3 March 2021 14: 06
        +7
        “... It should be borne in mind that the National Interest is not an American, but rather an American-language portal - actually controlled by Russia.
        ..."
        - that's what Russian hackers are capable of.
        One move of the mouse - and even the National Interest - becomes controlled by Russia ...
        8-)))
        1. Constanty
          Constanty 3 March 2021 14: 16
          -5
          In a 2016 article in Politico, journalist James Kirchik, commenting on Donald Trump's relationship with Russia, argued that National Interest and its parent company are two of the nicest Kremlin-friendly institutions in the country's capital, more than Moscow Carnegie Center


          The Foundation's board of directors felt that the Center in general and Simes in particular ... apologize, praise Russian autocrat Vladimir Putin, and even attack their party's presidential candidate John McCain for his condemnation of Russia's invasion of Georgia.



          Exactly the same opinions of Americans about the National Interest
          1. -Dmitry-
            -Dmitry- 4 March 2021 05: 47
            +1
            The Foundation's board of directors felt that the Center in general and Simes in particular ... apologize, praise Russian autocrat Vladimir Putin, and even attack their party's presidential candidate John McCain for his condemnation of Russia's invasion of Georgia.


            It seems to be written in Russian, but I don't understand a damn thing. Some kind of game ...

            In a 2016 article in Politico, journalist James Kirchik, commenting on Donald Trump's relationship with Russia, argued that National Interest and its parent company are two of the nicest Kremlin-friendly institutions in the country's capital, more than Moscow Carnegie Center


            Well, on the Internet, for example, they say that chickens are milked in Moscow. Is that true too?
            1. Constanty
              Constanty 5 March 2021 16: 05
              +1
              It seems to be written in Russian, but I don't understand a damn thing. Some kind of game.

              Sorry - I downloaded a translation from an English translator
      3. Revolver
        Revolver 3 March 2021 20: 20
        +2
        Quote: Constanty
        American-language portal

        And what, there are such? Wow, how long I have been living in America, but I have not met American-speaking people.
    4. tikhonov66
      tikhonov66 3 March 2021 14: 04
      +1
      "...
      Or - the Russians have a lot of tanks, give us a lot of money ...
      ..."
      - Don't, give us LOTS of money ...
      8-)))
    5. Baron pardus
      Baron pardus 3 March 2021 21: 07
      +5
      I once read an old book "Soviet Military Power". Release 1976, EMNIP. They wrote it there. There was already pride in the Motherland. T-62 - unparalleled in the world. With the most powerful cannon and armor. MiG-23 - casts doubt on the ability of the US Air Force to ensure the country's security. And further down the list. Each weapon is a wunderwuffle. MiG-23 - surpasses all aircraft in production of the US Air Force and Navy. T-62 is a super tank. BMP-1 - has no analogues. Mi-24 - combines the capabilities of the Iroquois and Cobra in one vehicle. Naturally, all this was done so that more money would be given to the defense industry. Generals, congressmen and senators then - own shares of factories producing weapons, their components and ammunition.
  3. Pereira
    Pereira 3 March 2021 09: 53
    +2
    He notes that the protection of the T-90M in comparison with the previous version has increased by almost one and a half times. How the American journalist came to precisely such indicators is not reported.

    I will assume that he simply calculated the decrease in the likelihood of defeat.
  4. Konnick
    Konnick 3 March 2021 09: 57
    -1
    This is from the article:

    The journalist also praised the new protection system of the Relikt ERA tank, which makes it less vulnerable to certain types of ammunition, including anti-tank guided missiles. He notes that the protection of the T-90M in comparison with the previous version has increased by almost one and a half times. How the American journalist came to precisely such indicators is not reported.

    The T-90M is noticeably faster, more deadly and more tenacious than its predecessors.

    - concludes the observer from the United States.


    And in the original it is a little more interesting:

    The T-90M abandons its predecessor's Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armor (ERA), bringing in its place the newer and more efficient Relic ERA system. The third generation of Russian ERA technology, Relikt offers up to 50% enhanced protection against certain types of projectiles, including anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs) and shaped charges. In short, the T-90M is noticeably faster, more deadly and more tenacious than its predecessors.
    1. Maks1995
      Maks1995 3 March 2021 10: 13
      +2
      Yes, sometimes they translate as they want ... Especially on the left sites
  5. prior
    prior 3 March 2021 10: 02
    -2
    It won't come to tanks.
    It is enough for Russia to carry out Operation Snow Storm.
  6. rocket757
    rocket757 3 March 2021 10: 04
    0
    The T-90M is noticeably faster, more deadly and more tenacious than its predecessors.

    BUT, new tanks already need to be made, supplied to the troops, provided training, maintenance and everything else necessary.
  7. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 3 March 2021 10: 16
    0
    American observer Mark Episkopos praised the survivability and combat effectiveness of the Russian T-90M tank
    Instead of the usual criticism from the American side in such cases, suddenly praise. So it is not long for the observer to reach (especially under Biden) and accusations of undermining the export of the American military-industrial complex. On the other hand, it seems like a trifle (some observer said), but nice.
    1. Constanty
      Constanty 3 March 2021 11: 34
      0
      In the National Interest, this is the norm, because it is a pro-Russian American-language portal - the fifth column in the United States. wink
      1. tikhonov66
        tikhonov66 3 March 2021 14: 14
        +3
        "... In the National Interest, this is the norm, because this is a pro-Russian American-language portal - the fifth column in the United States
        ..."
        - what kind of "fifth column" is there - take it steeper (like true democrats) - National Interest is "internal terrorists" !!! AAA ... aaaaa .. UZHIS !!!!
        - And in general, everyone who is NOT AMAZED with clinical RUSSOPHOBIA are "internal terrorists"

        The doctrine of the Washington regional committee is TRUE, because it is TRUE.
        Long live the Democratic Party of the United States. May all Trumpists die.
        Long live American democracy, human rights and gay European values!
        Long, long life for Chairman Biden!
        Urraaaa ... urraaaa ... urraaaa ...
      2. VORON538
        VORON538 5 March 2021 15: 43
        0
        Do I need after your words,
        Konstanty (Konstanty),
        to call you a representative of the notorious pro-American fifth column on the Military Review? bully
        1. Constanty
          Constanty 5 March 2021 15: 46
          0
          Look, in Poland they call me a dangerous Russophile.
          1. VORON538
            VORON538 5 March 2021 16: 00
            0
            Well, God forbid, but apart from your words, there is no evidence of this, and the inscriptions on the fence are approximately equal in truth to the texts on the world wide web hi
            1. Constanty
              Constanty 5 March 2021 16: 09
              0
              You didn't notice how often articles appear on WO about what they wrote about Russia and Russian weapons in NI.
              And this is all, without exception, laurels of praise. So either those who sympathize with Russia, or the so-called "useful idiots."
              1. VORON538
                VORON538 5 March 2021 16: 21
                0
                You never know what happens? Suddenly there are people there who do not see their goal as a confrontation of states capable of mutually incinerating each other and at the same time a good half of the world? Maybe yes, maybe no, but in any case, the actions of the American administrations are nothing good for Russia there was neither under the USSR, nor under the present! Look at your Polish government, at their speeches in relation to Russia, it feels like they are talking under the dictation of the State Department, although, remembering the words of their grandfather, who fought on the territory of your country with Hitlerites ... Not a fact hi
                1. Constanty
                  Constanty 5 March 2021 16: 26
                  0
                  Unfortunately, at present, the Polish authorities are very subordinate to the United States and, even worse, they are gripped by Russophobia. I am very sorry about this because it will not do any good. Rather a lot of tragedy
  8. Konnick
    Konnick 3 March 2021 10: 27
    -5
    Quote: rotmistr60
    American observer Mark Episkopos praised the survivability and combat effectiveness of the Russian T-90M tank
    Instead of the usual criticism from the American side in such cases, suddenly praise. So it is not long for the observer to reach (especially under Biden) and accusations of undermining the export of the American military-industrial complex. On the other hand, it seems like a trifle (some observer said), but nice.


    He appreciated the T-90M in comparison with our other tanks, but not with the Abrams or Leopard.
    1. Analkara
      Analkara 3 March 2021 10: 54
      +3
      Abramka and Leo skate well and shoot only in promo videos bully
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. The comment was deleted.
  9. Souchastnik
    Souchastnik 3 March 2021 10: 51
    -1
    Do they also put ERA GLONAS on tanks?
  10. sivuch
    sivuch 3 March 2021 11: 08
    +1
    KAZ is still needed
  11. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 3 March 2021 11: 12
    +2
    Threats to tanks (any) are now coming from above. A vertical blow to a turret or engine. This is what you need to think about - how to cover up this vulnerability
  12. Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 3 March 2021 12: 32
    +1
    Abrams is getting heavier and heavier, for asphalt or rocky terrain the very thing, let him come to us now, maybe a meter and pass.
  13. Azimuth
    Azimuth 3 March 2021 19: 52
    -3
    The T-90M is just a modernized T-72, which, in turn, is the development of the T-64 in terms of simpler, cheaper, massively. New fire control systems, which are new specifically for us, and not for our probable ones in the West, do not correct the design flaws of the T-64 / T-72.
    Here we discussed a lot of drone UAVs during the war between Azerbaijan and Armenia, but did not touch on tanks. If everything is clear with the Armenian tanks, then with the Azerbaijani ones, everything is more interesting. Azerbaijan bought 100 units of T-90S from us, the Armenians in Karabakh had quite a lot of ATGMs, so the meeting of T-90S and ATGM was not long in coming. As a result of these "meetings", unable to buy the Altai MBT from Turkey, the production of which is also in question once again, after the end of the war Azerbaijan asked South Korea about the possibility of supplying the K2 MBT, a copy of which is the Turkish Altai MBT. and is. The Koreans bought a license from the Germans and produce the engine and gearbox themselves, so they can supply, unlike the Turks, who take engines and gearboxes from the Germans, and therefore cannot supply their tanks for export without their consent in general and in Baku in particular - for the supply of weapons to Armenia and Azerbaijan to the EU embargo.
    So apparently our neighbors drew conclusions, and the war and its nature showed that they are not fools and in many ways are not inferior to the advanced armies. Both the T-90S and the BTR-82A received negative assessments, so there is no need to expect any more contracts with Baku for this equipment.
    1. shinobi
      shinobi 4 March 2021 07: 12
      +2
      Why would such a conclusion? Any tank is just a target against a modern ATGM. Look at how the Houthis are burning the western armored vehicles. Or is it bad too?
  14. Alexey from Perm
    Alexey from Perm 3 March 2021 20: 14
    +1
    It seems to me that "NI" is working in the same team with the US military-industrial complex ...
    1. shinobi
      shinobi 4 March 2021 07: 08
      +2
      It seems to be correct. Almost 60-70% of articles have been paid for by them. Through dummy accounts.
  15. tolmachiev51
    tolmachiev51 4 March 2021 02: 55
    -1
    - "So the American columnist Mark Episkopos" - is he definitely American !? Although. Judging by the name, brains think correctly, not in American style !!!
  16. shinobi
    shinobi 4 March 2021 06: 36
    +2
    The Americans need a new tank for wear and tear. And they don’t give money. So they began to praise. Objectively speaking, there is a truth for that. Remember the 90s, as soon as Russian tanks did not vilify after the war in Iraq. The truth was shyly silent. -80 and 60 were gouged by aviation, and in direct clashes the Abrashi showed themselves not so great, silent. At this time, by the way. How our tanks are fighting is full of information and videos on YouTube. And the ratio of losses is not in favor of the general. Houthi videos though and cleaned regularly, but infa says the Yankees are lying about their tank!
  17. Azimuth
    Azimuth 4 March 2021 09: 49
    -2
    Quote: shinobi
    Why would such a conclusion? Any tank is just a target against a modern ATGM. Look at how the Houthis are burning the western armored vehicles. Or is it bad too?

    With the help of ATGMs they burn everything, and the Abrams, and the Leopards, and the Merkavas burn like hay or straw. The only question is, with what frequency does the ammunition explosion and the flight of the tower occur, or the burnout of the charges, leaving NO chance for the crew? Look at the chronicle of how the Houthis or ISIS knock out the Abrams in Yemen and Iraq, the Kurds knock out the Leopards in Syria, Hezbollah knocks out the Merkavas in Lebanon, and how the T-72s were knocked out in Syria, in Ukraine, in Chechnya, take information on the news about the loss of crews and compare. You will discover a lot of new things since my post caused surprise.

    Capitalism is now, isn't it? Well, and for how long privatizers and state. oligarchs who have settled conditionally at state posts will sell tanks and armored personnel carriers of the 60-70s to our army at "competitive prices" ?!

    I was just thrown in a straight line, I was listening to an interview, a buffoon from "effective managers", declares that their basin, developed 60 years ago (!!!) and hung up due to sanctions conditionally with domestic sights, costs ALMOST 20% cheaper than the Western model, calling at This is one of the best European armored personnel carriers, where pardon other armor, instruments, gearbox, engine, etc.

    Tanks are produced by UVZ, now Rostec is owned by a state corporation, and Rosneft is also a state company. Questions?