A rare factory modification of the T-62 was spotted in the ranks of the armed forces of the LDNR

57
Source: ANNA-NEWS telegram channel

Most recently, a video was published in one of the telegram channels, as a column tanks T-62M is moving along the road near the village of Vrubovka near Severodonetsk. In principle, nothing unusual, if not for a car with a proper name "FartoVy", which fell into the camera lens. Unlike other tanks, this one was clearly distinguished by the absence of additional armor on the hull and turret.

T-62M


The T-62 tanks, along with the T-72 and T-90, can already be called the workhorses of the Russian army. And indeed, just yesterday they were in Syria, and just recently they came to light during a special military operation in Ukraine, which caused a lot of discussion about the appropriateness of their use in modern conflicts. However, it is immediately worth noting that the vast majority of the warring “sixty-twos” are a deep modification under the T-62M index.



The official decision to upgrade the T-62 tanks to the T-62M level was made in the USSR on July 25, 1981. As part of the work on this topic, it was ordered to increase the firepower and bring the armor of these aging vehicles to the level of the early T-64A and T-72 while maintaining their previous mobility.

The most recognizable feature of the T-62M tanks was the additional armor on the frontal parts of the hull and turret, consisting of an external steel sheet and a structure installed behind it in the form of steel plates and polyurethane filler. Mine protection has also been strengthened: 20-mm steel sheets are welded in the bottom part under the driver's seat.

The firepower of the vehicle was increased by installing the Volna automatic fire control system and the 9K116-1 Sheksna guided weapon system with the ability to launch guided missiles through a cannon barrel.

Soviet T-62M on the march. Source: arsenal-info.ru

Soviet T-62M on the march. Source: arsenal-info.ru

In addition to the above, the T-62M acquired anti-cumulative screens on the sides of the hull, a new 620-horsepower engine, the Tucha smoke screen system, Soda napalm protection, a heat-insulating cannon casing, an upgraded undercarriage, enhanced radiation protection and new radio equipment. Also, some tanks received the NSVT machine gun instead of the DShKM.

Not all T-62Ms are the same


A characteristic feature of the T-62M tanks was the lack of a clear implementation of all modernization measures, since work on them was sometimes carried out in an emergency mode. Often, some structural elements or electronics simply did not appear at the factories, so some machines of this series, for example, did not have additional armor on the forehead of the hull, Tucha smoke grenade launchers and even ballistic computers - the list is quite wide. There were also no special requirements for the tanks that were sent for revision, so the factory shops could have copies of different years of production with different equipment. An example is the very tank that lit up in the zone of the NWO.

Upgraded Ob.169. Source: ANNA-NEWS telegram channel

Upgraded "Object 169"

Even a cursory examination of the freeze frame from the video shows that the tank is not equipped with any additional protection and, most interestingly, Tucha launchers are installed in the frontal part of its turret in almost the same way as on the T-72A turrets. This gives some reason to believe that the so-called "Object 169" could serve as the base machine for this modification.

"Object 169" was released in an extremely limited series, consisting of only a few units, somewhere towards the end of the 70s of the last century. Its main differences from the massive "sixty-twos" were in those same smoke grenade launchers, which at that time were not yet installed on tanks and were in development. Also, the 169th was equipped with anti-cumulative rubber-fabric screens on the sides of the hull and a heat-insulating casing of the gun, which protected the barrel from the influence of the external environment and evenly distributed heat during firing. In fact, the car was a kind of intermediate option for testing new design solutions.

One of the basic options 169. Source: otvaga2004.mybb.ru

One of the basic variants of the "Object 169". Source: otvaga2004.mybb.ru

The tank turned out to be so rare that practically nothing was known about its distribution among the troops, except for one unit, which was in the Kazan Tank School.

"Object 169" in its original version, although it was equipped with a laser rangefinder, could not boast of either an automatic fire control system or a guided weapon system. However, the sources indicate that a certain number of these tanks still underwent modernization and received automation and missiles. One of them fell under Severodonetsk.

If all the necessary components were “delivered” to the tank, and as we know, this was not always done even on “emkas” equipped with additional armor, then its fire capabilities, although inferior in gun caliber, are comparable in accuracy to hitting targets with T-72A and T-64B due to the use of a ballistic computer and a laser rangefinder working in pairs, which automatically issue all the necessary corrections for firing.

Additional opportunities are provided by the Sheksna guided weapon system. Its anti-jamming missiles are capable of penetrating more than 600 mm of steel armor behind ERA.

Conclusion


Of course, one can talk a lot about whether T-62s are needed in the zone of a special military operation, but this particular specimen would look good in some museum like Kubinka or the Zadorozhny collection. And not because the tank itself is already quite old, but simply because it is rare.

As for its effectiveness on the battlefield, the lack of additional armor can make itself felt, but the use of this vehicle in secondary areas with a small saturation with heavy anti-tank weapons can be fully justified.

In addition, 115-mm "high explosives" are also quite weighty, and sub-caliber shells developed in the 80s can quite confidently hit Western peers of the T-62M in the face of the T-72M.
57 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +11
    21 June 2022 04: 45
    However, the sources indicate that a number of these tanks still underwent modernization and received automation and missiles.
    Yes, on the one that goes in the column, the 1K113 sight is perfectly visible, which means there is a guided weapons complex, and there is an increase in the VLD, I hope it is similar to the T-62M. And of course, it’s a pity that the mortars of the "Clouds" were not replaced at least with remote sensing ...
    1. +3
      21 June 2022 06: 53
      Quote: svp67
      Yes, on the one that goes in the column, the 1K113 sight is perfectly visible ... ... that the "Clouds" mortars were not replaced at least with DZ ...
      Yes, in the current environment, protection is a priority.
      1. -3
        21 June 2022 08: 30
        1. It's like fighting on a Mark IV (Mk IV) in World War II.
        2. Yes, you can, but not for long.
        1. +5
          21 June 2022 09: 12
          Quote: Civil
          1. It's like fighting on a Mark IV (Mk IV) in World War II.
          2. Yes, you can, but not for long.

          But this is incorrect. Because the very powerful T-62 gun has not gone away.
          "In skillful hands, even the balalaika is a percussion instrument."
          1. +2
            21 June 2022 09: 15
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            But this is incorrect. Because the very powerful T-62 gun has not gone away.
            "In skillful hands, even the balalaika is a percussion instrument."

            We know, we remember "bullet is a fool, well done bayonet." In capable hands, the T-34-85 is quite for itself, like the Hussites in slippers.
            1. -1
              21 June 2022 09: 35
              Quote: Civil
              In skillful hands, the T-34-85 is quite itself, like the Hussites in slippers.

              I would like to see how the M-113 against the T-34-85 fussed.
              1. +9
                21 June 2022 12: 23
                ..... Even with a cursory examination of the freeze frame from the video, you can see that the tank is not equipped with any additional protection
                As a person who served on the T-62, the side armor protection of external tanks and spare parts is immediately striking to me, which on ordinary T-62s is absent from the word "completely" + some kind of bulwark.

                For comparison:
                1. +3
                  21 June 2022 13: 53
                  To me, as a person who served on the T-62

                  It could really be hung with dor armor: sides, turret?
                  Like

                  Fast and cheap?
                  (well suo understandable yes)
                  Ilyich's eyebrows are clearly small and not relevant today
        2. +10
          21 June 2022 10: 32
          In 2001, we buried T-62Ms at strongholds and checkpoints. In the Shali region, there were also some T-55s at checkpoints. excellent tanks as stationary firing points behind the infantry. the coolest thing about the T-55 is that it could fire from closed firing positions like self-propelled guns, which was facilitated by a rifled gun.
          1. -1
            21 June 2022 12: 01
            This was when ... The Chechens did not have drones, and the Americans did not leak information to them from satellites ... Now, if a dug tank is found, they will easily cover it with artillery .. Unless it will work in the liberated territories
            1. +4
              21 June 2022 12: 50
              Right now, if a dug-in tank is found, they will easily cover it with artillery .. Unless it will work in the liberated territories
              Dear, according to your "logic", it turns out that now it is absolutely necessary for tanks to stop at all, they need to move exceptionally quickly, and the tactics of tank units in defense should be abolished altogether, ONLY ADVANCING !!! wink Yes, it is desirable to carry out refueling of tanks on the move, in this case it is possible to adapt the Il-78 tankers, for example ..... laughing
              1. -6
                21 June 2022 13: 17
                Dear, this is your opinion and conclusions, do not shift them to others, okay?
              2. -1
                22 June 2022 06: 05
                Yes, exactly, as in 1941, move only at night, otherwise it will cover the artillery, the UAVs will light up ... Shame
  2. +8
    21 June 2022 04: 49
    but this particular copy would look good in some museum like Kubinka or Zadorozhny's collection.
    Guys, give it back. feel
    1. +3
      21 June 2022 09: 29
      change to "tiger" lol
      1. 0
        21 June 2022 14: 10
        No, we need the Tiger, and the T-62 and the art of monkeys. One must admire the flight of n-t thought.
  3. +2
    21 June 2022 05: 02
    To test their effectiveness, they were removed from storage one-time. At what, apparently from the nearest base in the Crimea. I understand that secrecy, but delivery to the railway was only revealed once, unlike 80 bv.
  4. +4
    21 June 2022 05: 20
    A rare factory modification of the T-62 was spotted in the ranks of the armed forces of the LDNR

    The weapon is certainly old, but with proper and skillful use, there will be a niche for it to use. On the T-62 in the LDNR, local craftsmen were able to install dynamic protection. I hope, if possible, all T-62s will undergo such modernization.
    1. +4
      21 June 2022 10: 32
      Well, there is a "scheme" for equipping the T-62 DZ! It is implemented on the T-62MV!
  5. +2
    21 June 2022 07: 24
    To be honest, I would rather be in the T-62 than in the T-72. Of the means available to the enemy, everything that pierces the t-62 will easily pierce the t-72, and what cannot hit the t-72 is too tough for that, but 62 does not have a whole carousel (tower) of propelling charges under the ass . He would have a teplak and modern crowbars and you can fight great.
    1. -11
      21 June 2022 07: 35
      To be honest, I would rather be in the T-62 than in the T-72

      Who is holding you, in the armies of the DPR and LPR they will gladly take you as a volunteer and fight on the T-62, but something tells me that you are not rushing there. It's not on the forums to praise 50 year old rubbish
      1. -1
        21 June 2022 07: 37
        I do not praise 50 year old rubbish, but this rubbish is objectively more tenacious tank than the T-72. After all, modern anti-tank systems absolutely do not care what kind of armor the tank has. Stugna confidently takes 72 even head on, even with a relic, and nlaw and javelins don’t care about all this armor in principle. Such is the reality.
        1. Hog
          +4
          21 June 2022 16: 51
          NLAW punches the T-72 in the forehead, a funny anecdote.
          Not well, in theory, it’s possible and exactly the one that Object 172M is either in the NLD or in shoulder straps, but not in the VLD, and even with the Relic.
          1. -3
            21 June 2022 16: 59
            The Chukchi is not a reader, the Chukchi is a writer. You probably don’t even know how nlaw works, where it hits and what an impact core is and how it differs from a cumulative jet. And you can't read either.
            1. Hog
              +1
              21 June 2022 17: 53
              Stugna confidently takes 72 even head on, even with a relic, and nlaw and javelins don’t care about all this armor in principle.

              Learn to correctly formulate sentences so that others understand you correctly.
              Based on what you wrote, all this flies the T-72 in the forehead.
              PS: So who are the Chukchi here is a very big question.
              1. -3
                21 June 2022 17: 57
                It seems to be written in white in Russian that they don’t care about armor. This is because they do not fall into it, in my opinion this is obvious. You just can't read.
                1. Hog
                  +3
                  21 June 2022 19: 19
                  This is because they do not fall into it, in my opinion this is obvious.

                  The tank has a place where there is no armor, ok, I understand, the question is settled)))
                2. +1
                  21 June 2022 19: 42
                  we ourselves don’t know. But write nonsense. the nlau has 2 modes of shooting past the roofbreaker and also hits directly. it will hit directly. Yes and from above times on times not accounted for. there is also a video. there is a photo, and several nlaus were used one tank at a time and could not be destroyed. Yes, there were damages. but the crew survived. and the tank was taken out of the battle by him.
                  and you big dislike
            2. -1
              22 June 2022 12: 38
              About the Chukchi are you talking about yourself? To listen to you like this, the UFO and Javelin are some kind of prodigy, but I prefer the opinions of the tankers participating in the NWO ... than yours.
  6. -12
    21 June 2022 07: 32
    Everything that was driven away, especially without understanding modernizations ...
  7. +4
    21 June 2022 07: 39
    She is a cannon and a cannon in Africa. Any weapon capable of destroying the enemy is better than war without it. a rapier is used and nothing. The main thing in a weapon is the tactics of its use.
  8. -23
    21 June 2022 08: 09
    The Chinese launched the 3rd aircraft carrier, ours are proud of the ancient T64 shit .. Ahahaha. Well, since they ordered to be proud, we honor your noodles ..
    1. +7
      21 June 2022 11: 13
      Yours, yes, the T-64s are puffing.
      1. -13
        21 June 2022 11: 54
        In essence, is there anything to blather? Nothing .. And you pointed out the mistakes in order to raise your own self-esteem, psychiatrists call this complex the teacher's syndrome ... Ahahaha
        1. +1
          21 June 2022 19: 44
          soon you will be denazified at the wall
    2. -12
      21 June 2022 11: 16
      and with an EM catapult, which they couldn’t even do in the scoop, not to mention raisa
      1. +1
        22 June 2022 08: 17
        Quote from Roman Shi
        and with an EM catapult, which they couldn’t even do in the scoop, not to mention raisa

        Before you defecate, I recommend taking off your bloomers ...
        An aircraft carrier, for disassembly with dill, Russia does not need. And for the USA there are other means ...
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
        2. 0
          22 June 2022 15: 33
          it is perfectly visible, soon half a year as everyone is looking at the ancient bmp1 and 2, t72 of shaggy years, and now t62, mosin rifles and helmets of 41-45 years from the militias of the lnr and dnr, the sunken cruiser Moscow, and much more
    3. -1
      22 June 2022 12: 39
      Well, yes, there is nothing to be proud of yours ...
  9. +1
    21 June 2022 11: 00
    T-62s are handed over to the DPR and LPR. Better to have such a tank than not to have at all. Why are there crews ready to go into battle right tomorrow, then they give it. It is possible and necessary to master the electronics of the T-72B3 and T-90, but there is no time.
    1. -14
      21 June 2022 11: 55
      If I could put you on this ancient artifact and send you into battle, I would quickly change my mind ..
      1. +6
        21 June 2022 12: 05
        Tarasik, you don't even have those left. Beg for scrap metal from all over the planet.
        And this, for the future, is not for you, but the Russian Federation.
      2. 0
        22 June 2022 12: 40
        So yours rode on such scrap metal ... do you share your experience?
    2. +1
      21 June 2022 15: 29
      Quote: demiurg
      T-62s are handed over to the DPR and LPR. Better to have such a tank than not to have at all. Why are there crews ready to go into battle right tomorrow, then they give it. It is possible and necessary to master the electronics of the T-72B3 and T-90, but there is no time.

      At 62 if I remember correctly 4 people crew. It is ideal for training recruits or reservists.
  10. -2
    21 June 2022 12: 40
    It is possible that no more tanks are expected to be encountered, and if it crawls out from somewhere, then there are ATGMs, unitary shells should be safer when hit, although this is hardly a critical factor, the defeat of the BC itself, so that torches from all hatches immediately the phenomenon is quite rare, for the T-72, for the T-64 with the T-80, in which the MH is considered more vulnerable. It is necessary to hit very accurately, there are rollers from the sides.

    I suspect that the T-62 is purely mechanically much simpler, since almost the same T-54.

    And it is possible that this whole pack of T-62 appeared only because it was the closest in warehouses, and 115 mm shells were captured somewhere in wholesale quantities. X) It would be cool to see the T-64 without bukoff, with the same gun, if they are preserved somewhere at all.
    1. 0
      22 June 2022 12: 43
      So the Balakliya arsenal was still taken ... there is nothing there.
  11. +8
    21 June 2022 14: 13
    Quote: RipRap
    I do not praise 50 year old rubbish, but this rubbish is objectively more tenacious tank than the T-72. After all, modern anti-tank systems absolutely do not care what kind of armor the tank has. Stugna confidently takes 72 even in front, even with a relic, and nlaw and javelins have all this armor in principle on the drum. Such is the reality.

    Where did the firewood about "even with a relic" come from?
    Remarks from tankers repeatedly surfaced, where just this very "relic" repeatedly saved the crew. Unlike contact.
    T-80BVM with a "relic" shows itself from the best sides.

    Nlavs and javelins are, of course, dangerous weapons. But not an ultimatum, as practice has shown.
    As far as I know, there were no mass "throwing towers" as in promotional videos from the training ground.
  12. -1
    21 June 2022 15: 58
    Quote: TorukMakTo
    As far as I know, there were no mass "throwing towers" as in promotional videos from the training ground

    In February-March, there were enough photos and videos of tanks with turrets torn off on the net. And not all of these tanks were Ukrainian...
    1. +2
      21 June 2022 16: 02
      many tanks were burned when ours abandoned them, then the Ukrainians were forbidden to burn equipment
  13. 0
    21 June 2022 16: 05
    Quote: Mavrikiy
    but this particular copy would look good in some museum like Kubinka or Zadorozhny's collection.
    Guys, give it back. feel

    Zadorozhny has 2 T-62s in stock. And one with eyebrows.
  14. +2
    21 June 2022 17: 10
    The guys don’t know why the T-62M ended up there, but it seems to me that the reason lies in the fact that the LDNR lacks tankers trained on the T-72, but the T-62 may have. All the same, a lot of people at one time went through SA and the complexity of even the T-62M in full configuration is many times easier than the same T-72B or BM3. I don't know if I'm right, but... who knows?
  15. -5
    21 June 2022 20: 44
    no matter how later it turned out that the T-62 is only externally T-62
    and the inner
    ceramics and additional armor, built-in or mounted remote sensing (?), sights, communications, automated control systems, cameras (?), modified guns, ammunition (?)
    1. +2
      21 June 2022 23: 48
      Here is your fantasy.
  16. The comment was deleted.
  17. Kaw
    0
    6 July 2022 08: 55
    Interesting. The Germans put these smoke grenade launchers on their Panthers and Tigers, we only had them by the end of the 70s. Moreover, among the Germans, these mortars could still shoot with fragmentation grenades detonated in the air in order to destroy the enemy who climbed onto the tank, we (as far as I know) did not implement this at all. In general, as far as I can see in the news, these mortars are almost always closed with plugs in our tanks. Apparently shells are not issued for them and they are simply not used.
  18. 0
    21 July 2022 22: 04
    In all the comments about the reasons for launching the T62 to the front, it does not say that the gun on it is 115mm, but they made shells for it in Soviet times .... in general, there are a lot and not where they are used, that's all. The tank is like an armored artillery vehicle for suppressing firing points and it’s not a pity for the shells, enough for Paris.
  19. E B
    0
    25 July 2022 18: 37
    I agree with many comrades who advise making a body kit in some cases it will not help, but at least something from the simplest means of destruction, all the same 4 people crew
  20. 0
    1 August 2022 15: 36
    It looks like things are bad with our tanks. Since they began to get a rarity from the storage facilities. Tens of thousands of mailed birds did not pass without a trace. How many guys died because of the west