"There was a restructuring of the enterprise": the modernization of the T-62M and BRDM-2 vehicles in Chita switched to "military rails"

In the context of a military confrontation with the collective West, which uses Ukraine as a battlefield with Russia, the domestic defense industry is gradually adapting to new conditions, expanding the production of combat systems and reducing production time. One of the leaders in this process is the 103rd armored plant located in Chita.

According to the city administration, this is the only enterprise in the Russian Federation that has fully completed the government's task for the repair of combat vehicles.

The Great Patriotic [war] redirected the enterprise to war footing. Today, its production capacities are again relevant, because the planned indicators have increased, the staff has expanded

- noted in the report "Russia 24 Chita».

As indicated, repairs are underway at the Zabaikalsky enterprise tanks T-62M and armored vehicles BRDM-2, although other products are also shown on the frames, and the 103rd BTRZ as a whole is responsible for the restoration of a large range of armored vehicles. At the same time, the modernization of machines is carried out. So, the improved BRDM-2MS is equipped with a new engine, a thermal imaging sight and additional armor. Judging by the footage, a number of T-62Ms are undergoing limited modernization, receiving dynamic protection only in the front of the hull, on other machines of the same type, DZ is installed on the turret and on the sides, already corresponding to the T-62MV version.

The restructuring also took place in the organization of the work of the enterprise, the plant switched to a two-shift regime and a six-day [working] week. Three shifts are employed at separate production facilities. Today, the plant operates almost around the clock.

- declares the management of the enterprise, indicating that the increase in production at the 103rd plant is due to an increase in the supply of components, leading to an increase in output at other capacities of the country.

Comments

[kebeskin]

Instead of building new tanks, we are all modernizing the old ones. No matter how the T-34 began to modernize.

[chebman]

That is, B52 aircraft from the middle of the 20th century, which are in service with the richest state in the world, do not bother you?

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: chebman

B52 planes from the middle of the 20th century do not bother you?

B-52s, like our Tu-95s, are capable of performing the entire range of combat missions that are assigned to DA. T-62, no matter how much you upgrade it ....

[vovochkarzhevsky]

Do not confuse Tu-95 and Tu-95MS. Vehicles vary by year.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: kebeskin

Instead of building new tanks, we are all modernizing the old ones.

Judging by the photo in the article, they manage to get a gas turbine T62U from the T-80M through modernization - this is cool.

[hagen]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

T-62, no matter how much you upgrade it ....

The leadership proceeds from the consideration that the NWO is only the initial stage of the collision with Europe and the USA. Therefore, it is necessary to use old weapons. For the new - the time will come, and it is close.

[alexmach]

So the old is different. After all, there are still T-72b not modernized, there is T-80BV. There is something to do without the T-62s

[hagen]

Quote: alexmach

So the old is different.

According to the latest information, we have about 12 tanks from 000 and above in storage. Given that the fighting in Ukraine does not involve serious clashes of tank units from a company and above, it is possible to use the capabilities of reconnaissance to send equipment with serious anti-tank properties to tank-dangerous areas, and against armored vehicles of a lesser degree of armor (which the Europeans decided to supply in significant quantities to Ukraine) was considered possible use something like T-62. For some reason, it seems to me that the 62 mm gun is quite a serious argument against the Stryker, M-115 and other BMP-BTRs at any reasonable range from any angle. Just to get in, at least close. I am not talking about open infantry in the field or urban development. Although, as a fantasy, I would also think about replacing the standard turret with a combat module with a 113 mm howitzer, reserved from the projectile, designed in advance for firing from the PDO. T.s. Manstein's idea with assault guns in a new way. Newer ones, T-152 and higher, of course, also need to be modernized and prepared for delivery to the troops. Ukraine may be followed by other actions wider than the NWO. And you have to be ready for this. A modern tank, like the T-72, cannot be built a dozen a day, and during the war their repair may not keep up with their failure. Therefore, to drive EVERYTHING that is possible and accessible to CBO today is frivolity, because something must be left for tomorrow. And tomorrow the Poles and Germans will have leopards, Leclercs, and Abrams. With them, too, it will be necessary to settle the situation with something.

[megavolt823]

Unfortunately, I have to agree. I also think this is a start. Is not a fact. Watching how and how the stage ends. In fact, a lot is ready along the perimeter of the borders. And the country is as vulnerable as ever in 50 years. Much has been destroyed, sold and in ruins.

[S. Nikolaev]

T-62, no matter how much you upgrade it

I have only one guess so far. The hulls of the T72 tanks, of which there are thousands in storage, will go into production of the T-90M. Otherwise, what's the point of upgrading the T62, and not the T72

[alexmach]

Let them not go. There, the cases are different for the cases, and only the "latest models" are suitable for something.

[S. Nikolaev]

Let them not go. There hulls hulls are different

?
This is where the technical details come in handy. Well, or at least, experts' assessments

[alexmach]

This is where the technical details come in handy.

Yes, for God's sake, here are the technical details, straight from Wikipedia.

Different T-72 models have different armor. Another filler in the tower and another "pie" forehead.

Reservation of tank turrets of the first series monolithic.

Monolithic Carl!

T-72B (object 184; 1985) - a modernized version of the T-72A tank with a 9K120 Svir guided weapon system, Contact dynamic protection, a V-84 engine and a 1A40 control system, replacing the 2A46 cannon with a 2A46M cannon - launcher. Significantly increased the armor of the VLD (equivalent against BPS 490-550 mm) and a new tower with a filler of the "reflective sheets" type was used
T-72B arr. 1989 (1989; unofficial and incorrect name T-72BM is also common) - a modernized version of the T-72B tank with built-in dynamic protection "Contact-V", similar to that installed on the T-80U tank, as well as modified composition of the upper frontal part (equivalent against BPS 530-600 mm).

For the opinion of experts - please welcome to the experts.

So, according to unverified rumors, for modernization to the T-72B3 (not even to the T-90), only these same T-72b models of the 89 year, or else as they are called "late", go.
So count thousands of tanks in storage.

[S. Nikolaev]

Monolithic Carl!

Oh my God!
At least you would be embarrassed. What towers?! We're talking about tanks. Do you understand what a corpus is? Anyone who is even the least bit interested in the issue knows that the T-90M has its own turret, rolled-welded. Their production has been established, and it is the new towers that are being installed on the 90M.
And the T72, T72A tower, unlike the 72B, is really of no particular value, and only 72B are upgraded to 3B72. This is not a rumor, this is a known fact. Therefore, we are talking only about hulls, which, as far as I know, are not manufactured for the new T-90M, but are being finalized from 72.

[alexmach]

At least you would be embarrassed. What towers?! We're talking about tanks. Do you understand what a corpus is?

you would be embarrassed. Master at least two paragraphs of the text about which you yourself asked. There and about the body too. I even highlighted it in bold for especially talented people. They are different, and different T-72Bs also have differences. The network has pictures with details, thicknesses and fillings. Damn shy.

[S. Nikolaev]

Well, well, I couldn’t master everything, especially since you started talking to Karl. But where is the confidence that, due to differences in the VLD, the hulls are not suitable for revision for 90M

[alexmach]

But where is the confidence that, due to differences in the VLD, the hulls are not suitable for revision for 90M

These hulls do not meet modern requirements for resistance, primarily for resistance to kinetics. What's the point of using them then? There, therefore, the design was changed back in the 80s, twice. (this is only my estimated opinion, if anything, not agreed with the experts)

Well, the savings from using the existing hull is minimal, what is the point of destroying the full production cycle, including the hull, because of this, I don’t understand.

[S. Nikolaev]

the savings from using the existing housing is minimal

Yes, you are probably right. And you won't save much time either.

[ramzay21]

I have only one guess so far. The hulls of the T72 tanks, of which there are thousands in storage, will go into production of the T-90M.

In fact, everything is much simpler. It's just that Chemezov and his henchmen bankrupted and sawed up those repair plants that were repairing and could modernize the T-72 and T-80, and they had not yet had time to cut the plant 103. And so everyone knows that the T-62M was significantly inferior to even the earliest T-72 Urals, not to mention the T-72B.
Yes, we have thousands of T-72s in storage, but in order for them to become combat units, they must be driven through a repair plant, and these plants no longer exist, there is only a plant for the T-62M, which is why they are being driven for repairs.

[Codett]

I agree with you, but there is one more thing. This plant is capable of repairing both t-72s, the problem is the cost of repairing t-72s and t62s, officials and their children cannot fight on outdated equipment, otherwise they would have changed the brdm2 to something protected to reduce losses, otherwise they save, and the crews well here, apparently, the principle is that women are still giving birth, but they just don’t think that due to the so-called optimization of education, there are very few vocational schools capable of preparing new mechanical drivers in Russia, and there are problems with demography.

[S. Nikolaev]

In fact, everything is much simpler ... there is only a factory for the T-62M

Cheto you have helluva lot just everything that is simpler and you can’t imagine.
Both Omsk and UVZ and Chita can carry out restoration repairs of the T72, they have everything for this.

[UAZ 452]

Both Omsk and UVZ and Chita can carry out restoration repairs of the T72, they have everything for this.

This is only if their capacities are not fully loaded for the production of new tanks. However, this is just my guess.

[ramzay21]

Both Omsk and UVZ and Chita can carry out restoration repairs of the T72, they have everything for this.

These are factories that produce tanks, and for repair and modernization in our country, the USSR built tank repair plants. This is the same as dragging a broken Toyota or Mercedes to a factory where they assemble new cars for repair. It's expensive and stupid.

[78bor1973]

I don’t agree, yes, many factories have been sawn up, but there is also a tank repair plant in St. Petersburg, it repairs just the T-72 and T-80, by the way, and closer than Chita! Factories in Ryazan, Volgograd, Rostov should remain, but there are armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles!

[ramzay21]

I do not agree, but many factories sawed,

They continue to be slaughtered. So a month ago, Chemezov’s organized crime group, who settled in Rostec, sold 9 TsARZ in Engels for metal, which repaired MT-LB and can repair 500 BMP-1 and BMP-2 a year, and even Volodin who tried to intervene could not do anything.
The St. Petersburg plant is repairing the T-80, but it was either removed from service or returned because it was left at that plant and that it may not be clear, only Medvedev left after his visit, not very happy.

[Xenofont]

There is a suspicion that not all 72s can even be restored as a result of criminally careless storage. Our figures are no different from the Kaklyat ones in terms of theft and neglect of all storage standards.

[Zaurbek]

? Why? T90 is its direct successor - serial. What parts are missing?

[S. Nikolaev]

There is a suspicion that not all 72s can even be restored

Perhaps, just like not all T62s, but it is the 62s that go into work

[UAZ 452]

There is a suspicion that not all 72s can even be restored as a result of criminally careless storage.

And how did it happen that the T-72 was stored carelessly, and the T-62, it turns out - responsibly and carefully?

[alexmach]

And they were withdrawn from the troops in the 2010s. During the war on 08.08.08, 62 basically fought that.

[Santa Fe]

Otherwise, what's the point of upgrading the T62, and not the T72

These T-62s were used in combat units of the Southern Military District until 2008. They were in no hurry to change them to new ones, because it was considered a non-priority direction, the old ones are coping so far, which means new ones are not needed. That is, these T-62 tanks were still regularly started, serviced and moved somewhere in exercises and in battle (South Ossetia -2008)

On the contrary, the “thousands of T-72s” in storage did not start for three or four decades, and little seems to be left of them

Here is a paradox

[Snowfall]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

T-62, no matter how much you upgrade it ....

While the Armed Forces of Ukraine are waiting for the supply of Abrams and Leopards, our army is preparing to receive modernized T-62s and BRDM-2s.

[KCA]

Will Abrams M1 and Leopard-1 help a lot? Or do you think that the USA will deliver M1A2SEP v3? Or Germany Leo2 2A7V? Will melt junk

[UAZ 452]

Junk junk strife. The T-72B is also not a young man, but it can be mentioned in the same list with the M1 and Leopard of earlier versions (it seems that they still give the 2nd Ukraine, and not the 1st), but the T-62 is not.

[Santa Fe]

Will Abrams M1 and Leopard-1 help a lot?

Such tanks are not going to be delivered

Deliveries of Leo-1 were discussed last year (to no avail - only the Gepard ZSU and the Bieber bridge layer on the Leo-1 chassis were transferred)

Now that the topic of MBT has reached the finish line, the Armed Forces of Ukraine show interest only in Leo-2

Or Germany Leo2 2A7V

Leo2 2A4

The most massive and realistic option

[Grits]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

T-62, no matter how much you upgrade it ...

[bayard]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

T-62, no matter how much you upgrade it ....

... It will remain a tank produced until the mid-80s, which during the Five-Day War successfully hit the Georgian T-72s, and which is much better in combat formations than its absence. Which is much simpler than any of the T-64 \ 72 \ 80 \ 90 in maintenance and repair, takes much less time when withdrawing from the DH and is less prone to detonation of the ammo in the event of a defeat with a detachment of the tower. And most importantly - they ARE, there are quite a few of them at the bases of households, there are capacities for their restoration and ammunition for them. For service at checkpoints and for the protection of supply columns, as well as for fire reinforcement of infantry, you can’t imagine better ... in comparison with the towed Rapier, for example.

[UAZ 452]

Damn, if the T-62 is such a good tank, then why were the T-64\72\80\90 developed? If they are "more difficult to maintain, prone to detonation of ammo with a separation of the tower"? It turns out that our military-industrial complex has been engaged in sabotage and sabotage since the 60s?
PS In comparison with towed artillery, any gun on wheels or tracks is better, I agree.

[bayard]

Quote: UAZ 452

Damn, if the T-62 is such a good tank, then why were the T-64\72\80\90 developed?

Actually, in real battles under modern ammunition, our tanks of this generation (T-64 \ 72 \ 80 \ 90) appeared only after the collapse of the USSR. That's when, starting from Chechnya, everyone saw the towers flying up. This was the result of the appearance of an automatic loader and a shellless propellant charge. These charges in the carousel from the cumulative jet and / or secondary fragments ignite ... and give the same fireworks.
The T-62 has slightly weaker armor, but the shells are unitary and in a metal sleeve. And this is what neither is, but insurance.
but no one is trying to use the T-62M in anti-tank battles (although our Donetsk guys have already kind of left, and even seem to be successful), but to reinforce infantry and assault units. A tank is always better than an infantry fighting vehicle. Especially if it's BMP-1 or BMP-2. And all the more better "Rapiers".
By the way, the appearance of the D-1 howitzers in the assault units was also perceived by many as "zrada" and a shame, but in fact they replaced 122 mm. D-30, whose power was no longer enough, and there were interruptions with shells. Their range is approximately the same, but the D-1 projectile is almost twice as heavy. And there are enough of these shells in warehouses.

Quote: UAZ 452

It turns out that our military-industrial complex has been engaged in sabotage and sabotage since the 60s?

Of course not . The issue of increasing the rate of fire and at the same time reducing the crew to 3 people was decided. Less space is needed in the armored space, the tank turns out to be more compact with the same / better degree of protection. They were going to use them massively, and you can get into the automatic loader cassette only by shooting at the side at an angle close to the normal. So they considered the degree of survivability quite acceptable. The T-72B is even better in terms of security than the English Challenger-2, although it is 1,5 times lighter.
And for information - the T-62 has so far been put only in the corps of the republics of Donbass (even before the referendum) and it seems like PMC "Wagner" and Co. (Bars, etc.). They needed to be reinforced quickly.
And so at checkpoints in the rear areas, on supply routes, for escort services, strengthening the units of the National Guard in the rear areas, these tanks will be the best. Than nothing.
And for ambush actions in defense, they are also quite good. Better than Rapier.

[Shark Lover]

Again, it is better to ride with a trawl on a 62-ke if the regular BTS is out of order. And no electronics. Here is a crew of 4 people, and all tankers are taught for three. Loader, like what kind of way out of it? However, the interaction within the crew is different. Damn, but he has an ammunition rack, tin of course, how does he even get a shell from there? In front, on the right, there is a seat like in a train in the corridor and an ammunition rack at the bottom in front, you can drag such a 115 mm fool for a couple of days, then you won’t get up.

[sgrabik]

It all depends on how the tank is modernized, it is possible to make an older vehicle not inferior in its characteristics and combat capability to the newer T72B3, it may not reach the T-90M, but this is not necessary, because we have a huge number of tanks left for storage from the army of the USSR, it is necessary to modernize them qualitatively and competently dispose of them at the front.

[Zaurbek]

T62 with adequate modernization will be enough for almost everything .... 115mm is not enough for the modernized T64/72 and fresh foreign cars. Well, do not bet on the main lines. For mobilizers, they are easier to master, and the rest is a question of the budget that will be spent on modernization. Here is the MT55 - tanks from Slovakia with 105mm L7, communications and thermal imagers and armor.

[Santa Fe]

It all depends on how the tank is upgraded, it is possible to make an older vehicle not inferior in its characteristics and combat capability to the newer T72B3

It is forbidden. Even with a gun of the same caliber and modern sights

There are parameters such as, for example, the length of the BOPS, limited by the capabilities of the automatic loader

Or security - in direct proportion to the mass of the tank. And the maximum mass is “tied” to the engine and suspension

Only good auxiliary and transport vehicles, heavy armored personnel carriers are obtained from old tanks. But there are many pitfalls here as well. For example, a complete replacement of the MTO is required (to organize the landing route)

An alternative - turning the tank 180 degrees backwards, without replacing the MTO, will require replacing the fasteners of all torsion bars, shredding the entire car. Cheaper to build Armata T-15

[Ghost1]

And this b52 has already gone through more than one modernization for all the time, but these t62s have hardly been upgraded before, which means that in order to bring it to the modern standard, you will need to invest a lot in it.

[evgen1221]

So rejoice that. If the old ones pile on you like that, then what will happen if we go to the nearest bisto on the new ones? - For example, to Paris.

[Monster_Fat]

That’s not ... This is Western weapons, massively supplied to Ukraine - "obsolete", "worthless", "bross", etc. but ours - 50-40 years old production - "the very thing" !, "cheap and cheerful!", "in skillful hands will show itself"! "Hold on dill"!

[KCA]

I saw how the T-55s dug themselves in, completely old, and how they then jumped out of the shelter on alarm, they didn’t just leave, but jumped out, sparks flew about two meters from the exhaust, with proper use, the old technique will fit, the BRDM has excellent cross-country ability, and floats, besides, if they are not driven into the city or to the front line, there will be a use, but at least instead of traveling UAZ or Tiger, it will crawl anywhere, or after modernization, use it for its intended purpose - intelligence, the fact is that our equipment and 50 years ago it was produced for specific theaters, in the USA, for example, also for the deserts of the Middle East, all these MRAPs sit in the mud at the moment, and you have to work hard to pull out such a fool, shaggy PT-76s are somehow in no hurry to write off in Southeast Asia

[koramax81]

Your forelock is visible and it stinks of fat, don't burn so hard

[Sergey3]

They have one plus: the barrels of the guns are not worn out and there is ammunition from the Soviet times in warehouses. Think of it not as an old tank, but as a mobile armored weapon. And then all the new artillery went for repairs, and at the same time, there is a shortage of gun barrels and shells, although enterprises operate 24/7.

[Roma 1977]

The T-62 is a great tank. And it is obsolete only in comparison with modern tanks (if you arrange tank duels between them). But if it is used as a means of supporting infantry, then its firepower is three heads higher than that of any armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles. And in order for it to fully fulfill the task of supporting infantry, it should be equipped with dynamic protection, night vision devices and digital communications, which is being done to the extent possible. And most importantly, there are thousands of these tanks in storage, and it's time to use them for their intended purpose, until the resource is fully depleted. Where to store next?

[Luka Nord]

Russia opens (reopens) the underground cities of the military-industrial complex of the USSR! You cannot be "friends" with the Anglo-Saxons
We in Russia are just tired .. And all this genocide of Russia and Russians just got it .. We will fight and the devil is not our brother!

[Nikolay310]

op, this is a twist ... but what about the fairy tales about galoshes that only Africans bought ???

[Eug]

Here's one more Soviet "galosh" - ZMZ restored the production of 8-cylinder engines ... it turns out that if you don't stupidly follow Western Wishlist in the form of their "rules" (constantly changing in their favor), then Soviet galoshes can be very much in demand...

[nerovnayadoroga]

100000/500000++++++! +++!!!! This is what I dreamed of!!!!

[Sergey3]

op, this is a twist ... but what about fairy tales about galoshes

You do not believe in the existence of underground workshops? In vain. About underground cities, this is too much, although I do not exclude that some workshops are quite grandiose in size. For that, there is one plus: everything will be repaired, lubricated and modernized, so that it would work like a clock. Uralvagonzavod woke up first and is gaining momentum, while the rest are stewing in their own juice, consuming a huge amount of components, they will soon give birth! Well, I said that the production cycle is about six months, and orders went in August - September last year.

[cold wind]

It is very strange that they remove the "Brezhnev's eyebrows", and do not put DZ on them. Without them, consider that there is no protection against kinetics. Below is another "novelty" of our military-industrial complex. News like about Syria or Angola ....

[Aviator_]

On the leftmost motorcycle league there is a DShK machine gun, it is not clear what is on the middle one, and on the right, it seems, a naval 25-mm installation of the early 50s of the last century. Well, 12,7 cartridges for DShK are still being produced, but what about the 25 mm caliber?

[AMG]

This is 14,5 Vladimirov. Marine 2m-3 25 mm was in the tower.http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-66.html

[AMG]

2м-7, 14,5 мм.https://kpdclub.ru/yevpatoriya/post/675-dvuhpulemetnaya-145-mm-morskaya-tumbovaya-ustanovka-2m-7.html

[Snowfall]

Quote from cold wind

It is very strange that they remove the "Brezhnev's eyebrows", and do not put DZ on them. Without them, consider that there is no protection against kinetics.

The front of the tank is already overweight, it nods on rough terrain.

[ZeeD]

Maybe Brezhnev’s eyebrows are being removed and DZ put in their place simply because the T-62 does not shine to meet with kiretic ammunition (with tanks), but mainly cumuls from infantry threaten?

[koramax81]

Have you seen many of these at the front? me not. Or is it better to see from the sofa?

[alexmach]

At least one D-1 was seen at the front. But they say that this is a trophy and a "talisman", and she is really the only one there.

[alexmach]

Below is another "novelty" of our military-industrial complex

There is hope that this is for air defense of the near zone. Rumor has it that Ukraine has its own "Tehran" on the way

[Alexander Fomichev]

The cypress trees in the background don't tell you anything in which "region" and on which troops this "schnapps" is poured)

[Sailor]

Quote: kebeskin

Instead of building new tanks, we are all modernizing the old ones. No matter how the T-34 began to modernize.

One does not interfere. Along the way, 115 caliber shells are disposed of from storage.

[Nikolay310]

maybe it’s still worth fighting not with the logic of “we recycle junk”, but with the logic to save as many men as possible ???

these guys, if anything else, give birth to children, raise demographics ...

[Ermak_Timofeich]

give birth to more children, raise demographics ...

To give birth, a lot of mind is not necessary. But to educate ....

[Captain Pushkin]

Quote: Nikolay310

maybe it’s still worth fighting with the logic of “we recycle junk”,

Now the main work of ALL types of tanks in the Donbass is fire support from closed positions. There, the T-55 would have come up, it’s a pity they sawed it.

[syabroleonid]

a tank gun can withstand 350-400 shots. Howitzer-2000-3000 rounds. I prefer the howitzer. Simplicity + reliability + accuracy. + range.

[ZeeD]

Only with a howitzer will it not come out quickly to roll up on the front end under the protection of armor, but with a tank it will come out.

[Captain Pushkin]

Quote from syabroleonid

I prefer the howitzer.

Self-propelled guns are missing.

[alexmach]

Well, yes.
Tanks from closed firing positions, nur helicopters from cabriolet.

Self-propelled guns are missing.

Yes, damn it, at least reopen the Soviet Carnations, restore them ... but you also need to take shells for them somewhere.

[voyaka uh]

There are a lot of high-explosive tank shells in the warehouses.
But problems began with howitzer 152 mm - too
they were actively spent in the NWO.
Therefore, tanks began to be used as self-propelled guns for infantry support.

[Xenofont]

But what, tanks to support infantry were not used anywhere and never? You obviously wrote without thinking, the desire to convey the idea of ​​​​the lack of 152 caliber to you overshadowed the logic. Sadly! Yes, and idle speculation about the lack of means of destruction does not suit a decent person at all without announcing references to authorities.

[aszzz888]

Xenofont (Sergey)
Yesterday, 23: 22
NEW

+1
But what, tanks to support infantry were not used anywhere and never? You obviously wrote without thinking the desire to convey to you the idea of ​​\u152b\uXNUMXbthe lack of XNUMX caliber has overshadowed logic. Sadly! Yes, and idle speculation about the lack of means of destruction does not suit a decent person at all without announcing references to authorities.

this Jewish fake thrower is working on his soldering of matzah. Because he has everything according to the methodology. Lies are his mother!

[Zaurbek]

We have a monument to the Su-122-54 ... I think it will start

[Edik]

Quote: Nikolay310

op, this is a twist ... but what about the fairy tales about galoshes that only Africans bought ???

Quote: Nikolay310

maybe it’s still worth fighting not with the logic of “we recycle junk”, but with the logic to save as many men as possible ???

So it turns out that the country did not need these tens of thousands of galoshes and the leadership stupidly squandered the people's wealth? Now the country also needs to spend money on their disposal?

[Alexey Lantukh]

Always, including in the Great Patriotic War, they fought on what is available. And of course there are a lot of wishlists. Equally important, and even more important, is the skill of the users of the technology.

[Rage66]

A person does not read newspapers, and is not interested in the topic.
Otherwise, I would know the difference between repair plants and manufacturing plants for new equipment.
And so, he went in, farted into a puddle, and went on

[Plate]

Quote: Rage66

Otherwise, I would know the difference between repair plants and manufacturing plants for new equipment.

What is there to know? It's all in the title, after all.

[Uncle lee]

domestic defense industry gradually adapting to new conditions

Well done!
And on the case: "Oh, the Cossacks have been digging for a long time! Oh, and for a long time"!

[telemech]

Super! To transport tanks across the country for repairs in Chita! Then - back. It's good that there is no plant in Chukotka ...

[fiv]

Yes, they are stored somewhere nearby. Take them to the front line. Since China is still friendship, they are being taken to the west

[SlavaS]

The rest was sold and put under bankruptcy

[antivirus]

I remember about the rails when it gets hard.
And how did you pay in 2017?
"Rail builder Anatoly Borisovis Chubais"

[Nikolay310]

the distance between conditional Donetsk and Chita and the distance between Donetsk and Engels...

hello to Chemezov, who urgently needed to sell the plant in Engels ...

[Adrey]

Quote: Nikolay310

the distance between conditional Donetsk and Chita and the distance between Donetsk and Engels...

The reason may be something else. Information slipped here that a large number of parts of the Far Eastern Military District during the deterioration of relations
with China were armed with T-62. After rearmament, they remained there on conservation. Maybe they are just being upgraded before being sent to the NWO

[Alexey Lantukh]

Ride on a freight train for about 2 weeks.

[igork735]

He brought the plant out of a possible blow. Can he reward?

[Alf]

Quote from igork735

He brought the plant out of a possible blow. Can he reward?

His blow turned out to be more terrible ... To award, definitely, the Congressional Medal ...

[chebman]

It seems to me that the best option is to make a tank support combat vehicle out of the T62 by dismantling the turret.
In this form, it will be more useful on the battlefield.
The only problem in this case is the timing for the development of the combat module and subsequent alteration.
According to the mind, it was necessary to start this back in 2014 in order to equip parts in the LDNR with similar machines.

[cold wind]

There are no timing issues. All in mass production.
Angola has already upgraded its T-62s in this way. You just need to add remote sensing and / or screens.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

And what is this "Frankenstein" for? It is possible to push this for the RF Armed Forces only on the instructions of the SBU. The long-range and powerful 115-mm cannon with the ability to launch ATGMs through the barrel is being replaced by a module with a weak small-caliber cannon with a three times shorter point-blank range and openly located ATGMs. The tower becomes lightly armored and remains inhabited. Well, it would have been possible to understand the prospective uninhabited module "Epokha", otherwise the performance would be reduced in almost all respects.
African and Arab countries can be understood, they most likely have problems with supporting weapons in the rare 115-mm caliber. And why is this for Russia?
If they are converted into something similar, but with the Epoch module, then the completely outdated T-55s, and then you need to think three times.

[evgen1221]

Bmpt can also be taken from a motorcycle league in haste. A lot of people praise the 62s, simple and comfortable. And tanks today are all disposable.

[Plate]

Still, it is better that the tanks are not different. It will be easier for suppliers to live this way. And with them and all the rest.

[ivan1979nkl]

very good news - different tanks are important, all kinds of tanks are needed, and in wartime there are no extra ones

[Sith]

A good assault gun with protection for shooters from a lot of things and on the go
More guns for the gun god!
T-62 is essentially heavy infantry fighting vehicles
Dieu est du côté de celui qui a la plus grosse artillerie!

[DMFalke]

Why a "heavy infantry fighting vehicle" that does not carry troops? (Inside). Need fire support - take a tank. No, not this one 60 years ago, a little newer - T-72B3M1KLMNPRST. (Sorry, bombed from the names of modifications of tanks and aircraft. )

[Derbes19]

They are never BMPs. BMPs must carry troops.

[Alf]

Quote from Sith

T-62 is essentially heavy infantry fighting vehicles

And where is the infantry in it?

[t7310]

Quote: Alf

Quote from Sith

T-62 is essentially heavy infantry fighting vehicles

And where is the infantry in it?

Well, well - but on top, on the armor, but seriously, you can still weld benches, or an armored container, or a cart

[Alf]

Quote: t7310

Quote: Alf

Quote from Sith

T-62 is essentially heavy infantry fighting vehicles

And where is the infantry in it?

Well, well - but on top, on the armor, but seriously, you can still weld benches, or an armored container, or a cart

What is it about...

[Joker62]

Quote: kebeskin

Instead of building new tanks, we are all modernizing the old ones. No matter how the T-34 began to modernize.

And you are wrong! Who are you by military specialty??? I'll tell you, you are nobody and an empty phrase.
And as a specialist in armored vehicles, I will say one thing, those vehicles still have high survivability, they can still be used against both Leopards and Abrams.
As for me, I am already retired due to my age and have an iron armor, as a highly qualified specialist.

[andrewvlg]

It is not clear how the T62 with any kind of modernization can be used against the Abrams, the T62 with a 105-mm gun will not penetrate the forehead in any way, but the Abrams is any through 62-ku in any projection. Mounted dynamic protection will only save from cumulative ammunition, and even that is not a fact. At most, such modernized T-62s can be used against lightly armored targets (well, against infantry in not very strong structures, of course)

[Konnick]

T62 with a 105-mm gun will not penetrate the forehead in any way, but Abrams can penetrate any 62-ku in any projection

Modern tanks, even after being hit by a 105 mm projectile, especially a high-explosive fragmentation projectile, become incapable of combat, since the warheads of optoelectronic observation and aiming devices are very vulnerable even to a 30 mm gun of an infantry fighting vehicle or armored personnel carrier.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

The T-62 has a 115-mm cannon, powerful enough, you should know before writing.

[DMFalke]

You can even use BT-7 from museums. But have we really run out of thousands of T-72s?

[Derbes19]

Answer as a highly qualified military specialist in armored vehicles, if those tanks are so good, then why did they start producing a line of T-72, T-64, T-80 tanks instead?

[dontsov.an]

I agree, the survivability of those tanks is on top. Just have time to change crews. They would put in them all those figures who reported on the state of the Armed Forces all previous years and check for survivability.

[Alf]

Quote: Joker62

they can still be used against both Leopards and Abrams.

Only against Leopard-1, against Abrams-target.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

If the need to modernize the T-62 is generally clear, then there are questions about the BRDM-2MS.
There it would be desirable to have anti-cumulative grids, which can be called anti-drone.
And the most controversial decision is the installation of a turret from the BTR-80, which was outdated more than 30 years ago, we can say even at the time of its installation on the BTR itself. There is also a new MA3 tower, where there is a launcher for 4 ATGMs, an electric drive and an AG-30. Even the "Crossbow" module with machine-gun and grenade launchers will be better than the outdated turret.

[UAZ 452]

It can be seen that a certain number of towers or components for them were lying around in warehouses. The defenders decided to take advantage of the opportunity and get rid of the illiquid assets.

[dontsov.an]

"ROSTOV-ON-DON, July 14. /TASS/. The Russian armed forces have the highest percentage of modern weapons and military equipment among the armies of the world - almost 71%, said Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu."
It seems, according to the MoD, that everything produced after the 1917 revolution is considered modern military equipment.

[UAZ 452]

That is, 21% of what is available in the arsenals are mosquitoes, Maxims and Nagans?

[nepunamemuk]

some things don't work
Our factory also has two shifts.
truth and twelve o'clock shift
and week working seven days and the eighth day off
and that was before SVO...

[rocket757]

"There was a restructuring of the enterprise": the modernization of the T-62M and BRDM-2 vehicles in Chita switched to "military rails"

. It is necessary to respond to an external threat with mobilization in all spheres.
Too many enemies gathered.

[Alf]

Quote: rocket757

Too many enemies gathered.

Inside or outside?

[couch]

On good need to now work in three shifts 7 days a week. There is a lack of a lot at the front now, and not only tanks, but other small things (thermal imagers, ammunition, etc.) We are swinging for a long time, because the battles have been going on for almost a year!

[opposite28]

The Great Patriotic [war] redirected the enterprise to war footing. Today, its production capacities are again relevant, because the planned indicators have increased, the staff has expanded

- noted in the report "Russia 24 Chita".

One feels like saying: Our locomotive flies forward without stopping, we have a rifle in our hands ... In general, comrades are on the right path ... and so on ...

[AdAstra]

And yet the T-62 is the T-62, it's time to leave the old man alone. And the comparison with some bomber 52 is not correct. But the question is where are the 72 first issues?

[voyaka uh]

There are many of them in storage, but they were not combat-ready.
They were put into storage "as is": without repair of engines and with "screwed up" gun barrels.
The T-62s were in better condition. Therefore, they are put into operation.

[aszzz888]

voyaka uh (Alexey)
Yesterday, 20: 34
NEW

0
There are many of them in storage, but they were not combat-ready ...

another hype? Another casting of slops on the RF Armed Forces? you at least ONCE give links to the OFFICIAL document! Weak? Shame, you are not ours!

[Fangaro]

Gas + oil + ammonia + grain = friendship.

[Old_wars]

The modernization of old tanks is a good thing, given the impossibility of quickly increasing the production of modern ones, but the choice of the T-62 is still not clear, if the T-72 is in storage. It is impossible to say that a 105 mm gun cannot support infantry like the same BMP-3, just as it cannot be said that the vehicle will not find application at the front. Although, given modern realities, it would be nice to add a combat module with 2A72 behind the turret and attach containers with ptura to it. The weight will most likely be raised by a ton, but this will give a lot of opportunities. In fact, it will turn out to be a "terminator". To support infantry in an attack from closed positions, the vehicle will turn out to be very dangerous.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

Already the second in a row that he writes about the 105-mm cannon on the T-62, when there is a 115-mm cannon there. Did they slip a manual from the Ukrainian CIPSO with inaccuracies? Even the language of the commentary is clumsy, like a translation from English.

[Ilgizl]

This is of course wonderful. But it would be better to systematically start doing this much earlier, and not as usual when the need arose.

[Popov I.P.]

In the USSR Armed Forces, factories for the repair of armored and aircraft equipment were in every military district, and they were able to carry out not only the repair and restoration of equipment, but also its modernization. At the military level there were repair and restoration battalions in divisions and repair and evacuation regiments in the armies. Years of the so-called. reforms and especially the notorious Serdyukov outsourcing military repair almost destroyed, but about 5 years ago it was decided to restore repair units and units. By the way, they showed themselves well during the CBO. But it is more difficult with district plants, some of them died during the enlargement of districts or corporatized like arsenals. But in 3 years it is necessary to increase the army by 1,5 times, and this is not only personnel, but also equipment. It is clearly not realistic to rivet thousands of new tanks in 3 years, especially since in the USSR tanks were produced not only in Nizhny Tagil and Omsk, but also in Kharkov and Leningrad. But using the potential of the surviving repair plants, and, if necessary, reprofiling automobile and tractor plants for this purpose (including those of the only true ally - Belarus) - is quite realistic, given that, according to various data, we have from 8 to 12 thousand in storage. tanks of various modifications. The experience of the SVO has shown that there is no talk of raids by tank armies, tanks are used most often as mobile firing points or as part of small units. So it’s not necessary to have “Armata” here, restored and modernized vehicles of the old fleet are also good, especially since there should be a lot of reserve tankers in the Russian Federation who served on the T-62, T-64, T-72.

[AlexWar]

Why do we need such BTR-80s with 5-10 mm armor, which can be pierced with any machine gun
It was necessary to modernize them for sale, but always build new ones for yourself.
They did the right thing in the USSR, every 10 years they presented new samples
In Russia, for 30 years, not a single armored personnel carrier has been presented new

1 hour of the film The Battle for Moscow, see how light tanks were sent into battle. Here is the same today. Years go by and nothing changes in our country.

[Sergey_52]

It remains only to refer to the film "Terminator" indicating what awaits us in the future and to the film "Rimbaud" indicating what tough warriors are in the US Army ...

[alexmach]

Rimbaud by the way the film is very personal. About the social problems of soldiers traumatized by the war.

[UAZ 452]

Judging by the footage, a number of T-62Ms are undergoing limited modernization, receiving dynamic protection only in the front of the hull; on other similar machines, DZ is installed on the turret and along the sides, already corresponding to the T-62MV version

I don’t understand one thing - if the safety of the crew (relative, of course) requires remote sensing from all sides, then it’s criminal to put it on some cars only in front. Since the time of Ustinov, our military-industrial complex has been trying to give the military not what they need, but what is convenient for the military-industrial complex itself to produce, but not at the cost of the lives of tankers! The T-62 is not a child prodigy even after modernization, but if you still save money and drive frank bullshit ... Russian women have somehow not been very determined in recent decades to give birth to the Motherland of new tankers.

[vik71]

The great geostrategist did not take Kyiv in 3 days, but left all the equipment for 3 months near Kyiv.

[megavolt823]

62, the youngest is 50 years old. The question is not about the idea of ​​the tank and its equipment. Equipment over 50 years old. Physically. 50 years of wiring. 50 years of metal. And everything else is at least 50 years old. The conversation is not about something that is outdated. Technically. This is scrap metal. What are you talking about here?

[Mikhail Maslov]

Tanks, shells, missiles, but did anyone think, when are you thinking of teaching people? At least on the T-62, at least on the T-90, or will we again "grab men" for mobilization and into battle? Where are the training sessions, where are the training grounds? Who will these tanks be needed if the crews see each other for the first time. What kind of interaction?

[Alexander Fomichev]

everything that is published in Novoye Vremya on the Moscow Region looks like an exchange of opinions of those who ONCE served the HOMELAND. there are no sketches of the mobilized, no vacationers after the contract, no explicit words of censors, only "someone's chatter." Yes, and ukroTrolley here is just a VAL.