Kyiv announced the shipment of another batch of decommissioned T-72A tanks from Belarus to Russia

Belarus removes from storage Tanks T-72A, after which it transfers them to Russia, another echelon with military equipment set off from the Minsk region of Belarus to the Rostov region of Russia. Ukrainian sources suggest that these tanks will soon be in service with Russian army units participating in a "full-scale invasion" of Ukraine.

The Belarusian military removed from storage another batch of T-72A tanks, the equipment was located at the 969th tank reserve base in Urechye, Lyubansky district, Minsk region. According to Kyiv, a total of 24 tanks were included in the batch, they have already been loaded onto platforms and sent by rail to the Rostov region.

According to Ukrainian sources, this is the sixth batch of tanks sent from Belarus to Russia. In total, 94 T-72A tanks and 44 Ural trucks have recently been removed from mothballing, all of them have been sent to Russian territory. It is suggested that the equipment will go into service with new units, including those recruited as part of partial mobilization.

Neither the Russian nor the Belarusian Ministry of Defense comment on the transportation of tanks, now the military of the two countries are busy deploying a united group of the Union State on the territory of Belarus. According to the official data of the Belarusian military department, the Russian military is transferring to the republic about 170 tanks, up to 200 infantry fighting vehicles - armored personnel carriers, about 100 guns and mortars with a caliber of over 100 mm. The group will also include about 9 Russian servicemen.

It turns out that Belarus is sending to Russia the tanks removed from the mothballing supposedly for participation in hostilities, at the same time Russia is transporting its tanks to the republic.

Meanwhile, American intelligence reports that the Russian-Belarusian group is gradually building up forces near the borders of Ukraine, the danger of an invasion from the northern direction is increasing.

Comments

[SKVichyakow]

Some kind of absurdity looms. Why drive tanks back and forth?

[Mint Gingerbread]

Possibly for upgrading. Maybe the Republic of Belarus does not have the capacity and ready-made components for on-site equipment.

[S. Nikolaev]

Why modernize the T-72 when there are still enough T-72Bs in storage? The place, probably, is being vacated for equipment newly arriving in the Republic of Belarus. She must be somewhere.

[Jean Baptiste]

My comrades in Yelnya were trained in two weeks to be tankers from the airborne troops, and they were given exactly t 72 a, apparently this is a trend

[S. Nikolaev]

and they gave them exactly t 72 a

Then I don't know what to think...
Well, trend duck trend

[Oden280]

T-72 was created as a mobilization tank.

[Mint Gingerbread]

Even so, the place was vacated and the new batch was modernized It's bad, it's good.

[S. Nikolaev]

Duck, the fact is that 72B with a more protected tower are going into modernization. But, if, as they say here, already 72, 72A are going to the troops, then I don’t really understand what is happening

[alexmach]

But, if, as they say here, already 72, 72A are going to the troops, then I don’t really understand what is happening

The opinion that the T-72b suitable for modernization is running out has been circulating for a long time. This also explained the return to service of the T-80BV and their modernization program.

[Repellent]

Quote: alexmach

The opinion that the T-72b suitable for modernization is running out has been circulating for a long time. This also explained the return to service of the T-80BV and their modernization program.

Doesn't it occur to you that the T80 is a completely different machine, with other capabilities? However, the diagnosis is disappointing, if so.

[alexmach]

Doesn't it occur to you that the T80 is a completely different machine, with other capabilities?

That is, not a tank but a plane? No... it can't be.

[Repellent]

Quote: alexmach

That is, not a tank but a plane?

Helicopter, please. The engine is from there.

Quote: alexmach

It can not be

So it is, nevertheless.

I drove both 55-ku, and 64-ku, And 72-ku. Eighty - I didn’t even try, it’s so unlike

[Smirnov Sergey]

The return to service of the t-80bv is more likely due to their advantages in terms of gas turbine engines and certain problems in the production of engines of 1130 hp for the t-72b3.

[alexmach]

The return to service of the t-80bv is more likely due to their advantages in terms of gas turbine engines

This is the official version, yes.

and some problems in the production of engines of 1130 hp for the t-72b3.

I haven’t heard of this, but just look how many of them were returned to service. How many units rearmed from BV to B3 were wiped back in a couple of years. In my opinion, the most reasonable explanation for what is happening can only be a lack of 72s .. Perhaps engines for them, as you say.

[Repellent]

Quote: alexmach

This is the official version, yes

GTE is the ability to quickly start and leave at almost any temperature.

Diesel in the cold, you will warm for a long time and painstakingly for this. See "boiler-heater", and all related.

Specialists, lol.

[alexmach]

GTE is the ability to quickly start and leave at almost any temperature

almost any temperature in Russia happens almost everywhere, however, only the Far East was re-equipped back by 80.
Well, those who made the decision to withdraw the 80-k to the reserve and unify the park were not completely fools. Well, let me remind you again about Finov.

I drove both 55-ku, and 64-ku, And 72-ku. Eighty - I didn’t even try, it’s so unlike

Well, crew skills are a matter of training and education.

[Repellent]

Quote: alexmach

those who made the decision to withdraw the 80-k to the reserve were not completely fools

No, they weren't. This does not change the fact that 80 is absolutely not similar to 64-72-90

Quote: alexmach

crew skills are a matter of training and education

There are polar opposites of skills. The engine is different - accordingly, other requirements for the mechanic

[Alexga]

GTE is the ability to quickly start and leave at almost any temperature.
Diesel in the cold, you will warm for a long time and painstakingly for this. See "boiler-heater", and all related.

A somewhat strange statement, When starting a cold engine, you are right, but a warm diesel engine starts ten times faster.

[Repellent]

Quote: AlexGa

A somewhat strange statement, When starting a cold engine, you are right

Emma..

Ray was about starting a STANDING engine in the cold. Am I understandable?

[Alexga]

about starting a STANDING engine in the cold. Am I understandable?

Understood-understood!!! This is the only advantage of this design. Moreover, a single tank can go fast in a straight line. So?

[Repellent]

Quote: AlexGa

even in a straight line a single tank can go fast

And these are your girlish dreams. I'm not interested, oh sorry

I have not yet seen the advantages of the east-middle before the seed-double)

Or vice versa

[Alexga]

What are the advantages of the eighty can be discussed? I have only noted two. The rest is only cons, starting with the chassis, power, MOH and so on.

[Repellent]

Quote: AlexGa

only cons, starting with the chassis, power, MOH and so on

More from now... if there is anything, of course.

[Alexga]

More from now... if there is anything, of course.

Yes please! Suspension: short torsion bars fixed in the middle of the bottom of the tank, small diameters of road wheels that rotate at a higher angular speed, do not close the sides of the hull, tracks with parallel RMS are used, one track consists of 14 nodes, in sand conditions the service life is minimal. The fact that they were not set to 72 was mistaken. Power block: fuel consumption up to 12 liters per kilometer, three additional barrels are not included in the power system, the failure of any element of the power block requires a complete replacement of the block, repairs can only be carried out at the factory, and the replacement of the power block in the troops was carried out only by the factory brigade, at least in the days of the USSR it was so. Everything is very expensive, and the fuel range is very small, in military trials the value was 247 km. The MZ is very confused by design, it works at a speed no faster than the AZ T-72, when loading it is required to remove the spent pallet from the cassette, the crew is inside the carousel with shells and charges. I remind you about the small diameter of the track roller. There are also questions about the FCS, in particular, the very inconvenient location of the "wind sensor", the rangefinder ring "hangs" on the central square, blocking the video review in the sight. If you remember, about a month ago there was an article about the integrity of the T-80 when compared with the T-72. Everything was interestingly written there, but the moment about firing failures was missed, so there are 36% due to system failures on the T-80, and only 2% due to system failures on the T-72. Other refusals from the actions of the crew. But the crew can be taught, but the system cannot. That article was written from an article in the Bulletin of armored vehicles 1989, number 1, p. 12. You can check, the Bulletin has already been declassified. Have questions - ask. So I wrote a lot.

[Repellent]

Quote: AlexGa

Have questions - ask

Yes, it’s already clear .. especially the following:

Quote: AlexGa

there was an article about intactness T-80 compared to T-72

You feed on articles from the Internet.. you are nobody and uninteresting from now on, my apologies

Eighty with GTD - 100 points ahead of my native sixty... although I can do anything on it if I inject an anesthetic

[Alexga]

Eighty with GTD - 100 points ahead of my native sixty...

Oh, so you are from the category that is on "Zhu-Zhu", then it's understandable. Good luck.

[Repellent]

Quote: AlexGa

You are from the category that on "Zhu-Zhu"

No, non-native. I’m a tanker .. I was, 60+ already, they don’t even take to fight anymore, but left as a starley.

And you're nobody, I'm sorry.

[Alexga]

And these are your girlish dreams. I'm not interested, oh sorry request

Here you are wrong, in winter in the steppes of Transbaikalia it is really faster than 72. But only in a straight line.

[Repellent]

Quote: AlexGa

in winter in the steppes of Transbaikalia, it is really faster than 72. But only in a straight line

You are the same tanker as I am Belerina.

Do not write to me again, never interestingly.

[bayard]

Quote: alexmach

In my opinion, the most reasonable explanation for what is happening can only be a lack of 72s .. Perhaps engines for them, as you say.

This is explained by the fact that there are from 3000 to 5000 T-80s of various modifications at the storage bases. And most of them with almost zero mileage. It is a sin to scatter such a resource, and even spend money on the disposal of practically new (by resource) machines. Therefore, it was decided to start upgrading the BV to BVM and equip the Arctic direction and the Far East with them. And the choice of their place of service / deployment was precisely because of the possibility of a quick start in the cold.
T-72 at the storage bases are now at least 7000 units. , but the modifications there are very different. Modification B will be upgraded to B3 \ B3M, modification A will be restored with repairs and modernization is much more modest. Some tanks can be used as a base for conversion into BMPT-72 (Terminator-2) or TBTR, or simply - refurbishment and commissioning. Different tanks are needed, different tanks are important. Since the T-62M is being returned to service (and this is very good), then there will be a place for the early modifications of the T-72 in the ranks.
And there are also up to 4000 T-64s of various modifications at the storage bases. They are not touched yet, but if there is a need, it is possible to revive them. Moreover, the corps of the republics of Donbass have been fighting for such a ninth year. The towers of the Soviet MBTs are interchangeable, so there will be no special problems with them, but when restoring the chassis, you will have to do cannibalism. But 4000 tanks with an almost full resource are worth such an effort ... Of course, if necessary. This is also a very good resource.

[alexmach]

Modification B will be upgraded to B3\B3M

Somewhere they even said that B of the later years of production, they seem to be something else early B from later ones.
Everyone talked about 7000 in storage, but it’s not known at all how many of these Bs are suitable for modernization.

modification A is restored by repair and modernization is much more modest

There was no information anywhere about exactly how A was being modernized. But, in my opinion, they have very primitive sights. And better armor...

Since the T-62M is being returned to service (and this is very good), then there will be a place for the early modifications of the T-72 in the ranks.

Here is one more of the short things that surprise - the return of the T-62 to service with the T-72 and a large number of T-80s in storage, plus the T-64. There seems to be plenty to choose from.

[bayard]

Quote: alexmach

Nowhere was there information about how exactly A.

The network can be found export modernization of the T-72A to the version of "White Eagle" - it was offered and delivered to Latin America and possibly Southeast Asia. "Contact-1" remains there, the sighting system and part of the avionics have been modernized. Now, when removed from storage, such tanks will most likely be subjected to refurbishment and minimal modernization - for the sake of the pace of delivery to the troops.

Quote: alexmach

the return to service of the T-62 in the presence of the T-72 and a large number of T-80s in storage, plus the T-64. There seems to be plenty to choose from.

The fact is that the time and money to return to service / upgrade the T-62M need to be a multiple less than for the next generation tanks. The absence of an automatic loader with complex hydraulics and mechanics greatly speeds up and simplifies the process. Repair and maintenance of such tanks in the field is also much simpler and cheaper. Therefore, it is not surprising that the Ministry of Defense remembered such a tank. In addition, there are repair plants sharpened specifically for the repair of these particular machines. After all, now it is important not only the quality of tanks in the ranks, but also their QUANTITY and the pace of their delivery to the troops. Now there is a high probability that the armed forces of the NATO countries will act on the side of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, moreover, officially, having entered the territory of the former Ukraine. Therefore, there should be a LOT of tanks in the standing position, and since we have them, everything that is and is possible must be returned to service.
With the T-72, and even more so with the T-80, even without modernization, the hassle of repairing and returning to service is many times greater. but several repair plants, as well as Omsk and Uralvagonzavod, are engaged in their repair and modernization at once.

[alexmach]

Networks can be found export upgrade of the T-72A to the version of "White Eagle"

It seems that everywhere they write about the fact that this is a T-72B.

[bayard]

Yes, my mistake, I hoped for memory.
But modification A is also pulled from DH, so the update will be minimal.
And their chassis can be used to produce the BMPT-72. And for conversion into TBTR ... it would be where and to whom.

[smart ass]

What don't you understand? Big losses in the tanks of the Russian Federation, so they plug everyone in a row

[S. Nikolaev]

in Russian tanks

You, Wasya, were a little hasty in putting in your 5 shillings. The situation with losses and upgrades is somewhat different, which smart people confirm.
But you still try. try

[smart ass]

Did the grandmother on the bench tell you or did you see it in Russia24?

[S. Nikolaev]

About what? About shillings? No, this is an assumption. As an option - visa-free and lace underpants. However, a lot of idiots do it for free, they are also called useful.
But this, of course, does not apply to you, you are smart. Is not it?

[smart ass]

Instead of swearing arguments) your level is clear

[ramzay21]

But, if, as they say here, already 72, 72A are going to the troops, then I don’t really understand what is happening

Everything is very simple. Our grouping in Ukraine numbered a little over 100 thousand and there were enough tanks and infantry fighting vehicles. And now 300 thousand will be put into operation, and to create a BTG, a huge amount of armored vehicles, including tanks, is needed. That is why they put into operation everything that is possible and the T-62M and T-72A.
Ukrainians are doing the same, they are given not only export analogues of the T-72A, the T-72M tanks, but also the T-55, which is much worse than the T-62M, moreover, they throw lightly armored Hummers into battle, and ordinary pickups and jeeps are not at all intended for this.

[alexmach]

but also the T-55, which is much worse than the T-62M

The Slovak craft is just the same analogue of the T-62M.

[Piramidon]

Quote: S. Nikolaev

She must be somewhere.

In Belarusian storage warehouses, or what?

[S. Nikolaev]

Well what can I say? In peacetime, storage warehouses, and in any turbulent (like ours, for example) - just warehouses

[trenkkvaz]

And why continue to keep older modifications in storage?
Now is just the case when everything that is in storage should go into battle.
Or are they waiting for something else?

[ZoV]

Quote: Mint Gingerbread

Possibly for upgrading. Maybe the Republic of Belarus does not have the capacity and ready-made components for on-site equipment.

Well done tanker! Fumbling

[ryst]

Belarusian T-72s from warehouses, unlike Russian ones, are in good working condition.

[Fizik13]

Quote: Mint Gingerbread

Possibly for upgrading. Maybe the Republic of Belarus does not have the capacity and ready-made components for on-site equipment.

Just for modernization. They bought T-72B3 from us for 16 years, then they had their own development. Most likely, after trial operation, they came to the conclusion that ours is better, cheaper and faster.

[ruha]

For dill, logic is not the main argument!

[Warrior with machine gun]

They sold the logic a long time ago or drank it away.

[ZoV]

Quote: Warrior with a machine gun

They sold the logic a long time ago or drank it away.

It remains oh wei and other Anglo-Saxon country dances

[donavi49]

Do you mean inconsistency? Transfer to units on the territory of Russia - there they are tested by crews and already further in distribution. Well, you won’t introduce the conditional 90th division from Chebarkul (the last part of the RF Armed Forces where regular T-72A remained) to the training grounds - all the fields will be plowed there, the Old Man will have a heart attack right away. Therefore, first to Chebarkul - there is a run-in at local training grounds, and then where the motherland will send.

[Ros 56]

Well, how for what, but at least to powder the brains with stripes according to the principle of thimblers - I twist and turn, I want to deceive.

[Non-fighter]

As an option - for modernization. Experts will tell you which tank is on the platform.

[dmi.pris1]

In the photo, the station in Orsha. Direction to Smolensk. It is clear that it is for modernization. And rightly so

[Alexga]

Dmitry, there is a lot of incomprehensible here. First, the video shows the North side of the Orsha railway station, and along it the traffic passes in the direction of Smolensk-Minsk, along the South side of Minsk-Smolensk. Probably the video was shot in the opposite direction, so, the usual video editing of the SBU. I have not seen oversized markings, such as those on the tank, on the Belarusian Railway, but everything can be. I assume that these machines could be sent to Borisov for 140 TRZ for modernization. From Urechye to Russia, they could get to Orsha only along a large circle. There the road is easier, Urechye-Osipovichi-Mogilev and further to Fayansovaya. Especially in Urechye, the platform is loaded in an easterly direction, here it is the other way around.

[dmi.pris1]

Yes, I’m rather mistaken. I haven’t been to Orsha for a very long time. Previously, they often went there in the 70-80s

[Alexga]

I always had a transfer to the south in Orsha. The station is very beautiful, it was built after the war by captured Germans. Yes, and Orsha itself is an ancient city, the same age as Minsk, born in 1067.

[dmi.pris1]

Well, I lived in Smolensk for half a century. Ten years since I moved to the Kuban

[Ulan.1812]

Quote: Not the fighter

As an option - for modernization. Experts will tell you which tank is on the platform.

Most likely. And apparently for Belarus.
Old Man is also strengthening his army.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: SKVichyakow

Why drive tanks back and forth?

There is a planned replacement and refreshment of reserves. The Belarusian seventy-twos are being removed from storage, and until they have completely lost their condition, they will be sent to the fields "to mow the harvest." And instead of them, new T90M will come. And those machines that are in service today will go to the storage bases in the HH. This is how they do it in all the armies of the world.

[Maxim G]

In the normal armies of the world, the most modern equipment is sent to war, and not from storage.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Maxim G

In the normal armies of the world, the most modern equipment is sent to war, and not from storage.

It all depends on what tasks this technique faces and what is the "level of opposition" to this technique. For BTV dill and T-72A is enough. Let me remind you that at one time they d.b. resist the Abrahams and Leopolds of the first modifications.
Therefore - "one tablet is enough" (c) - as Lelik said in "The Diamond Hand".

[Maxim G]

Don't you think that our tankers should go into battle on modern tanks, with modern equipment, KAZs, and everything else that is needed to minimize losses?
I think so.

[Repellent]

Quote: Maxim G

Don't you think that our tankers should go into battle on modern tanks, with modern equipment, KAZs, and everything else

Or better yet, the Death Star. Well, to immediately.

Hey, well, I'm a tanker. It already was, really.

And why exactly do you not like current tanks? point by point, clear

[Maxim G]

Quote: Repellent

And why exactly do you not like current tanks? point by point, clear

T-14 with KAZ, modern communications, sights, thermal imagers and everything else suits me with everything (at least as it was presented in articles and TV shows).

"Current" tanks are not satisfied with the low protection against anti-tank systems. Primarily.

[Repellent]

Quote: Maxim G

T-14 with KAZ, modern communications, sights, thermal imagers and everything else suits me with everything

I poop on what suits you.

Once again, the question is:

Quote: Repellent

what exactly do current tanks not suit you with? point by point, clear

I really was a tanker, Vasya, be careful

[Maxim G]

Learn to communicate with people.
Then questions are allowed to be asked.

[Repellent]

Quote: Maxim G

Learn to communicate with people

I am good with people. Yes, ahem, there are difficulties with primates.

Quote: Maxim G

Then questions are allowed to be asked.

Kid, to ask a question, you need to know at least half of the answer. You are not at all in the subject, where did you get something? Ignorant, damn

[trenkkvaz]

Ha ha, your stupid comment fits well with the latest news that Britain is removing 60 Challengers from storage to be sent to Europe.
Show me at least one so-called normal army of the world, which has been waging the last 30 years or is waging a war of such intensity as Russia is now, before asserting this.
All your normal armies in the world will be left without tanks at all after a month of such a war.

[Maxim G]

How many tanks did Stalin remove from storage after heavy losses in 1941?
Or in 1939 in Finland?

And why did you decide that you can compare the T-62, T-72a and Challenger-2, which has been in production since 1994? Those. much younger.

[trenkkvaz]

You have some completely stupid arguments. And what kind of tanks do you think were in storage at the end of the 30s? ))
Then at that time they just started to mass-produce tanks in the USSR.
The USSR used cavalry in the war, although there were already cars and tanks. This is worse than using old tanks.

[Maxim G]

Cavalry was used in modern warfare, or do you think they were constantly worn with sabers?

The USSR provided itself with new tanks, including making up for losses after the battles of 1941.
But you probably don’t realize that the industry must work for this.

[Alexander Salenko]

And how many tanks did Stalin have in storage? Maybe it’s worth reading something about the tanks of that time first? I recommend the book by Ulanov, Shein "Order in the tank troops." Read it, then it will become clear to you that the situations are basically different, and the times are different. For example, Canada was armed with British-made tanks, which is logical, Mark-5, two of the same tanks can be seen, only upgraded, in the photo near the Reichstag.
In 1941, the French Saint-Chamon tank was just over 20 years old, do you know what it looks like?

[Maxim G]

And how much was Somua S-35 and B1 bis?

You apparently didn't get the point.

[Alexander Salenko]

I caught the stupidity about decommissioning. If there are claims to our industry, then there’s a hell of a lot of tanks in storage, that’s why they were put in this very storage.

[Maxim G]

Doesn't it bother you that modern or relatively modern tanks will be replaced with older modifications or models?

[Alexander Salenko]

Well, you are not embarrassed that the BT-7 took the most active part in the defeat of the Kwantung Army, and the T-70 reached Austria and Hungary.

[Maxim G]

So this is a drop in the ocean of tanks produced during the Second World War.
And the replacement of lost tanks took place with new models, modifications, and not vice versa.

[Alexander Salenko]

Well, what prevented the BT-7 from being replaced by other tanks? There are so many of them that it really happened? Probably T-34-76 will be better than BT.
And in fact, they did what they could do, like the named T-70 and its predecessor T-60, do you know what kind of artillery weapons it had?

[Maxim G]

Probably BT, 60, 70 are light tanks, and 34 are medium.

Something all in one...

[Alexander Salenko]

Well, what's the point in light tanks, if the concept of MBT is already looming? I am already silent about the fact that the BT comes from the Christie tank, when the topic of wheeled-tracked tanks was still developing. Then, in general, the obsolescence of armored vehicles went faster, as it always happens when a new type of weapon just appears, and you decide to compare something there.
If my goal was to overwhelm you, I would have done it at the snap of my fingers, because I wouldn’t take into account, for example, the fact that industrialization had just passed in the USSR and would ask a petty question, but how was the Red Army equipped with cars under Stalin? How many three-ton trucks have we produced, for example? The Germans have an Opel Blitz, is this the norm, but what about us? And we have a lorry, i.e. to transport one mass of goods, the Germans needed one car, and we needed two. And how many modern Russian army took trucks from the national economy, can you tell me?
Self-propelled artillery as a class became noticeable at the front only in 1944, and the Germans had complete order with this from the very beginning of the war and they produced many types of various self-propelled guns. In 1944, Germany, having a lot of problems, produced 17 thousand units of armored vehicles, despite the fact that the country is a capitalist country, and therefore the equipment itself was more complicated than Soviet, and, as a result, more expensive.
in principle, we didn’t produce such a type of armored vehicles as armored personnel carriers, and we also didn’t have armored tractors, cable layers, no matter how well you and I treated Stalin, the USSR was technologically lagging behind, you are talking about lagging behind the leader from developed countries by 50 -100 years heard? As for technology, somewhere, in the most important areas, like nuclear physics or space, we have taken the lead, but for example, I watched the movie "Following my own course" not so long ago, released in 1974, it is black and white. At the same time, I saw a private pre-war shooting in Germany. This is just one of the illustrations.

Now let's get back to the present. What's wrong with using T-62 tanks in the fight against an enemy that is short of armored vehicles, as evidenced by their pickup truck rides? The only drawback that I see is the issue of supply, the gun is different. No one will feel sorry for the motor resources of these tanks, just like the barrels, and it is necessary to dispose of 115-mm shells this way and that, and these tanks are not used to break through enemy defenses, it is rather a means of supporting infantry, and as for the tank’s function of influencing the rear , then what's the difference which tank will hooligan in the rear?

[Maxim G]

Is there a difference in tank protection against ATGMs between T-62, 72, 80, 90, 14?

As for trucks from the national economy, they are used, for example, to transport humanitarian aid, and prisoners of the Armed Forces of Ukraine were transported by bus.

[Alexander Salenko]

There is a difference, just like there is a difference between the T-62 and a pickup truck. And will we compare the firing distance of the T-62 and ATGMs? Any tank can be stung from an ATGM, but the main tank killer is artillery, and a projectile from the same rapier is about the same as a T-72 or a T-62. And newer tanks will be useful to us for battles with a more modern enemy, so they save them.
Humanitarian, this is not a purely military task, but as for the bus, well, it’s probably more comfortable, or they removed it for show. In our rear area there are a lot of KAMAZ trucks and Urals riding back and forth.

[Maxim G]

Tell me, since the beginning of the NMD, have you helped our military, Donbass militia, civilians of Donbass and new territories of the Russian Federation in any way?
Or can you even help for 8 years while the conflict in Donbass is going on?

[Alexander Salenko]

Tell me, have you run out of arguments? Well, do not write more, no one is forcing you. Yes, I helped with something, satisfied your curiosity?

[Maxim G]

What's stopping you from answering?
Yes or no?)

[Alexander Salenko]

Did I answer you, or did you not read to the end? It's a shame, otherwise I was so crucified about the Second World War, and you mastered only one sentence.
I, intermittently, have been acting against the anti-Maidan authorities for 9 years, even before they came to power, I started, but what did you do?

[Maxim G]

Quote: Alexander Salenko

I, intermittently, have been acting against the anti-Maidan authorities for 9 years, even before they came to power, I started, but what did you do?

What a vague wording, but oh well.

I send, first, the SVO, humanitarian aid and money to Donbass, on my own behalf.

[Alexander Salenko]

Well, now I don’t have the opportunity to do it regularly, but nothing prevents me from directly helping the soldiers, right? By the way, they are still trying to refuse, and a humanitarian aid, and even in the 14-15 years I sent it, and you saw the Bandera people only on TV, and I personally. Greetings from Crimea from a participant in the Russian Spring.

[ZAV69]

And what "normal" armies are fighting now?

[Maxim G]

The USSR did not remove tanks for war from storage.

Quote: ZAV69

And what "normal" armies are fighting now?

[ZAV69]

Were there tanks in storage in the USSR when he was at war? There, the conveyor worked in 3 shifts, if it could work in 4, it would work in 4. But I don’t consider the Afghan war a war.

[Alexander Salenko]

Yeah, only the MS-1 tank, nee Renault FT-17, was in service? by the way, its variations were stormed in Harbin in 1945, it was the swan song of the first tank with a classic layout.

[rocket757]

The tanks will be upgraded, and then ... and what can happen next ???

[Boa kaa]

Quote: rocket757

The tanks will be upgraded, and then ... and what can happen next ???

How!? You don't know... what will happen next???
-- I will reveal a terrible military secret: THEY WILL FLIGHT TO BEAT the airfields of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and intercept the Su-57 of the Russian Aerospace Forces !!! Don't believe? -- In vain! Lucy is already preparing a speech about this!

[rocket757]

Even the autumn weather can't keep up with Lucy's mood changes...

[tralflot1832]

But putting a smartphone to a lover to take pictures in one place is not an option?

[Fisherman]

a good option ... only Belarusian tanks are being transported to Crimea along the Crimean bridge, you can’t snitch on everyone’s smartphone there, and the enemy clearly understands and knows that it’s not just that tanks are being driven along the railway to Crimea (without any modernization), therefore, near Nikolaev, the troops of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are now concentrating, which are being removed from other directions ... and people are being called to leave Nikolaev ... so the direction of one of the strikes is clear to EVERYONE. In the same western Belarus there is no photo evidence, but almost everyone is aware that there is a considerable group hanging over the "Lviv transit", MI-6 announced three weeks ago that trains to Belarus were packed to capacity with Russian troops, and only three days ago they showed us "arrival of the first train with Russian servicemen." Secrecy from its citizens when the enemy has been in the know for a long time - there is nothing more stupid, so at least we are proud of our Army and believe in its success, because any maneuvers and movements towards the ENEMY are inspiring ... but the silence of the RF Ministry of Defense with dry reports - drive the people in melancholy, and ordinary people begin to exaggerate someone else's information, thrown in by enemies. To squander communication with one's people is for all authorities in the old Russian tradition. For example, I am proud that ours so quickly hung over the "Lviv transit" that even the Clown yelled at the G-7 "put G-7 peacekeepers on the border of Belarus with Ukraine" and the Poles and the Balts moved everything to the border with Belarus, what they had from the troops. The entire Internet is in these photos and videos, and our Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation is holding us for idiots ...

[tralflot1832]

I remember the Brezhnev withdrawal of tanks to the GSVG. 1000 T 62 tanks, the entire division was smoke from the exhaust, so that it could be seen from the satellites. a month at night I saw this beauty in the park of a tank battalion. Under a canvas canopy so that they would not be seen from the satellite. Moving around the division, only on tractors and with guards and only at night. .The Germans in gastets started asking stupid questions about the T80.

[Mikhail Sidorov]

Secrecy from its citizens when the enemy has been in the know for a long time - there is nothing more stupid, so at least we are proud of our Army and believe in its success, because any maneuvers and movements towards the ENEMY are inspiring ... but the silence of the RF Ministry of Defense with dry reports - drive the people in melancholy

Reminds me of one episode.
US intelligence reported before February 24 that Russia brought large stocks of donated blood to the regions bordering Ukraine.

[dmi.pris1]

This idiot was filming at the crossing bridge, a little to the right. From the platform they would have detained him there, but it’s not visible from the kushers.

[Alexga]

This half-wit filmed at the crossing bridge,

No, this is a picture in the eastern side, from the side of the monument to Zaslonov.

[dmi.pris1]

Then, it turns out that the train is heading towards Minsk .. Filmed from the side of the railway tracks. As far as I remember the location in Orsha.

[Alexga]

Yes, on the west side there seem to be more entrance doors

Quite right, the main entrance is from Minsk, and here is the service entrance.

[Tatyana Makarova]

This is what interests me ... Do Belarusian officers participate in the operation, even if for the purpose of acquiring combat (!) Experience? Or is it a "military secret"?
Zheldak

[Vaўkalak]

Who will tell you this? Even if this were the case, the one who reported this would be quickly brought out by the Committee under white hands)

[Xnumx vis]

Quote: Vaўkalak

Who will tell you this? Even if this were the case, the one who reported this would be quickly brought out by the Committee under white hands)

You have a very correct committee.

[Irokez]

Quote: Tatyana Makarova

Do Belarusian officers participate in the operation, even if only for the purpose of acquiring combat (!) experience?

I will answer with one rule: - "Whoever gives the correct answer - he will receive 20 years."
You are under suspicion with this question.

[Fisherman]

for what purpose are you interested? under which article of the Criminal Code do you want to sit down?

[Tatyana Makarova]

I always give you +, I read your comments with interest ....
And you told me - "according to the article". Eh!
OK. I realized that excessive curiosity is fraught with ... No more buuudu.
Zheldak.

[Fisherman]

I myself go under the article, publishing thoughts not in the vector of power ... so we smile and wave

[ZIF122]

Yes, the Kyiv authorities believe themselves do not respect!

[zxc15682]

There are never too many tanks, there are always not enough of them. Infantry loves tanks.

[dFG]

these are forelocks with annoyance write that not immediately to the front, but through modernization

[isv000]

The West is doing exactly the same thing - they clean out the old from storage, send it out, and in return acquire a new one. Everything for Ukraine, on both sides...

[U-58]

It can be assumed that the tanks will be upgraded and put into service.
In return, Belarus will receive new tanks in the future, possibly the T-90, but ... later, when the job is done.

[alexey alexeyev_2]

Judging by the photo, the tanks are naked. Without protection. They will hang up protection and return

[Mint Gingerbread]

There, not only the application of remote sensing is required. Replacement of all optoelectronic equipment, radio station, etc.

[rotmistr60]

Neither the Russian nor the Belarusian Ministry of Defense comment on the transportation of tanks

And they do it right. It was not enough to comment on Ukrainian sources.

[Mouse]

It's simple ... Ukrainians accuse us of what they themselves are guilty of ... how much Western technology is there? We have a shortage...

[Maxim G]

To what extent is the modernization of such tanks, as well as the T-62?
Dynamic protection, and what else?

[Vitaly161]

well, 62ka gets multi-channel optics with TVN, they would put such optics on 72b, and you still can’t do more with 62, hang up the relic at most, because the T62m hodovka is already overloaded, where else to throw armor

[Maxim G]

Those. Can't put KAZs on them anymore? Yes and no?

[Vitaly161]

do we have serial KAZs? or at least one series of tanks with him?

[Maxim G]

Quote: Vitaliy161

do we have serial KAZs? or at least one series of tanks with him?

As far as I know no.

[Vitaly161]

so why write about them? just to blurt out?

[Maxim G]

Quote: Vitaliy161

so why write about them? just to blurt out?

Did you notice that there was a question?
Or from simple questions, immediately hysterical?

[Boniface]

I have one question:
Russian intelligence is also working well, counting "without exception" someone else's equipment and where is it going ???

[Skobaristan]

Well, you can write to the RF Ministry of Defense, so to speak, ask a question about the work of intelligence. If it's not rhetorical.

[VORON538]

Even if this is so! or what? From what drinking would?

[Vaўkalak]

On the one hand, it can also be modernized. On the other hand, what version of the modernization of the T-72A is there in Russia? I don't even remember. And besides, we are armed with the T-72B and B3M. Yes, and "Urals" that, too, for modernization, or what? Who will modernize the trucks? They are already in storage and in the Armed Forces of the Republic of Belarus at least in one place. So it is quite possible that they will be sent mobilized, if the T-62 is in business again, what can I say. In any case, it’s good if we help, it won’t be superfluous (taking into account the loss of armored vehicles) and how many mobilized are called up. It is only desirable that at least some kind of DZ be hung and the filling replaced.

[JonnyT]

Here's dad, well done!
Preserved the same heritage from a highly developed civilization.
And Russia will repair them, modernize the suo, radek, golonas with a teplok.

[Bingo]

For modernization - a no brainer. But not a pig

[Andrei Nikolaevich]

Well done Belarusians! They did not squander military property, like the Ukrainians. A wise people chose a wise leader.

[vadivm59]

something I completely stopped understanding something. In Russia, along the border with Ukraine, defense lines are being built already in 2 rows, here is an article about this. In Belarus, they are afraid of an invasion by Ukraine. Do they have human resources there? all from the west. and l / s from where.

[lopvlad]

Belarus removes T-72A tanks from storage, after which it transfers them to Russia, another echelon with military equipment left the Minsk region of Belarus for the Rostov region of Russia.

this is a kind of exchange, because in their place Belarus receives new tanks from Russia.
Why is this being done? .Everything is very simple, namely, the military potential of Belarus must be quickly increased as it becomes the new front line of confrontation with NATO.
By sending Belarusian equipment to Russia, two problems are solved, namely, it frees up space for new equipment in Belarus, and it immediately receives this newest equipment, since it takes time to modernize and repair its equipment, but it doesn’t exist. Unlike the Ukrainian direction, where this time is still going training of the mobilized, and when this equipment is needed here, the "Belarusian" T-72A, after repair and modernization, will be ready for new military groups from the mobilized.

[Aag]

Dear administrators!
Correct the title of the article - it sounds somehow incomprehensible ... Not in Russian.

[Adagka]

As I understand it, their own tanks, listed in the generals' reports, have long been scrapped and turned into generals' estates?

[Mavrikiy]

Belarus - 517 T-72B, 23 T-72B3, as well as 713 T-72 in storage, as of 2021 year

Yes, there is still stock. Before acute need in the T-62 is still far away. Yes, and with us

7000 T-72, T-72A and T-72B in storage, as of 2021

[camo]

By the way, for some reason, not a single T-72AV from both sides was lit up in the SVO. There were T-72A and T-72B and their modifications, but no T-72AV

[Vladimir Zhuravlev]

At the moment, the Russian army has about 3000 tanks in service and another 15000 tanks in storage.

[George Miloslavsky]

Sources of DEBIL. There are more than 22 tanks in Russia, of which only a part is in parts, the rest are in storage, and this is a large part. We don’t need tanks from the outside, when the tanks themselves, like a fool, have candy wrappers, moreover, they are modernized. The Belarusians most likely send us tanks just for modernization to the manufacturer.

[Archivist Vasya]

It turns out that Belarus is sending to Russia the tanks removed from the mothballing supposedly for participation in hostilities, at the same time Russia is transporting its tanks to the republic.

- And this, children, is an example of the circulation of tanks in nature.

[barbiturate]

Obviously, they were taken for modernization, there are a lot of tanks, but storage in lack of money was also not the best, and there were few modifications of B, mainly modifications of earlier versions and already in great need of repair and modernization.