Military Review

T-90 vs Challenger 2: who has a better chance?

163
T-90 vs Challenger 2: who has a better chance?

Judging by how events are unfolding, it is quite possible (we have already considered it) when their Challenger-2 will meet in confrontation with our T-90M. In fact, in place of the Russian tank anyone can turn out to be, from the T-62M to the T-90M, and here an interest arises: can a British tank really be able to show something like that on the battlefield?


Residents of the British Isles are considered by many to be reserved and conservative. In fact, those who have never been to British League football may think so. But yes, there is conservatism. But in fact, it is also quite flexible. Here the best example is Triumph, one of the oldest (1887) motorcycle companies in the world. Yes, in 1983 the Triumph went bankrupt, the Japanese brought it under the monastery, but immediately got up and continued with the new owner to produce very decent equipment. Modern, with a twist. And not inferior to Yamaha, Honda and Kawasaki and successfully competing with them.

So what is really new in British approaches is more than. To whom the Triumph is not enough, you can look at the Rolls-Royce, although this is no longer a completely British product. But - perfectly combining the classics and the latest technology.

Tanks are not cars and motorcycles, yes. Tanks may not work that way.

It all started in the late 80s of the last century, when the understanding came to British heads that something had to be changed. There was a carriage: the implementation of a very promising project by the same Rolls-Royce under the name MTV-80 failed. The tank was supposed to become an opponent of the Soviet T-64 and T-72, but already at the level of models it became clear that the T-64 could not be caught up. There was no need to talk about the T-72 at all.

The export version of the MTV-80, called "Shir-2", even began to be built under a contract with Iran. But bad luck, a revolution broke out in Iran and the supply of tanks had to be forgotten. And "Shir-2" was already in the metal ...


And then the British canceled all work on the MTV-80 and, on the basis of the already built Shir-2, they began to do something that would allow them to recoup the invested funds and at least slightly improve the situation. "Shir-2" began to turn into "Challenger-1". The principle “I blinded him from what was” in the flesh. But in general, the idea is not bad, the Shir-2 was a good tank for the Persians, so strong that it would be difficult for them to break it, and this is a very important point in this case. And therefore the temptation was great to make a tank for the British out of a tank for the Persians.

In general, it didn't work out. Leopard 2 and Abrams were much better. Therefore, British tank builders immediately began working on the second Challenger model. Externally, the second model did not differ much from the first, the main difference was the new combined armor "Burlington", which, judging by the calculations, should be twice as effective as the previous ones.

In 1991, the British military department arranged a competition for MBT for the army. Participants in the photo: Chieftain Mk10, Challenger 1, Leopard 2A4, M1A1 Abrams, Vickers Mk7/2.


The Vickers tank was recognized as the winner, it was hard to say what it was better than the others, evil tongues claim that the only advantage was that this tank was produced in the UK. But it is also an argument.

And literally after the Vickers, the Challenger 2 was thrown in. It was again tested together with the Leopard 2A5 and Abrams M1A2. And suddenly I liked the tank so much that it was decided to take it into service.

Tests that lasted until 1994 showed a number of positive aspects (good cross-country ability, good work of the hydropneumatic suspension, very accurate shooting from a place) and a number of shortcomings (work of the suspension "at the limit", less accurate shooting from the move, extremely unsatisfactory operation of the SLA).

In general, it turned out to be such a tank: "Challenger-2", aka "Challenger-1", aka "Shir-2" differed from the original project, in fact, only by the Dorchester armor, consisting of layers of steel and ceramics, padded with shock-absorbing layers.


In general, in terms of protection, the Challenger turned out to be a very complete machine. It was equipped with ROMOR dynamic protection units, which was very useful in terms of protection against the same RPG-7, a VIRSSS system was installed for thermal smoke production of a smoke curtain (they completely copied the Soviet TDA), two L8 five-shot smoke grenade launchers that can throw both smoke grenades and infrared jammers and fragmentation grenades.

But the main masterpiece of classicism is a cannon. Regular rifled gun ROF L30A1, inherited with minimal modifications from the old "Chieftain". The barrel length was increased to 55 calibers, and the rifling was left, and now it is one of the few tanks in the world with a rifled gun.


Today, many argue on the topic of whether this is a blessing or a victory. Yes, a rifled gun does not fire cumulative projectiles, since excessive rotation does not affect the formation of a cumulative jet in the best way. Therefore, it is better to stabilize normal cumulative shells in flight not by rotation, but by folding plumage, and for this a smooth barrel is just better.

The lack of rotation improves the formation of a cumulative jet and significantly increases armor penetration, while removing all restrictions on the speed of the projectile, which can exceed 1000 m/s. Well, the resource of a smooth barrel is much higher than that of a rifled one. But depleted uranium scrap dispersed in a grooved barrel is also a rather weighty argument.

The British military was absolutely satisfied with this alignment. The main projectile for the Challenger was the HESH ammunition, which could break the faces of both light armored vehicles such as infantry fighting vehicles / armored personnel carriers, and puzzle infantry that had settled in long-term structures. And ATGMs should generally fight enemy tanks, but in the absence of such, the British tank had quite sane armor-piercing shells.

And there was no need to worry about the resource of the gun barrel either: thanks to the use of electroslag remelted steel, the resource turned out to be no less than that of a smoothbore gun. 500 shots. The barrel bore is chrome-plated, and outside it is covered with a thermal protective casing, which reduces the effect of temperature differences on shooting accuracy. And the cherry is the stabilization of the trunk in two planes. Not very conservative, is it?


But if someone wants something like this, mossy - here's a separate-cartridge loading for you. Moreover, manually. No AZ, no MZ, everything is classic. The loader needs to take a projectile in one place, put it in a tray, then get a cap with gunpowder from another place, and an ignition tube from a third. That is, the loader is rushing around like hell around boilers in hell, on the go this is generally a special buzz and one can only dream of a high charging speed. However, dividing the shot into three parts significantly reduces the likelihood of detonation of the ammunition rack on impact. Armored containers for ammunition can hold 52 rounds. Enough for a fight.

The LMS, we admit, is decent, but not very reliable. If it does not refuse for some reason - even above average. Ballistic computer (digital, of course) with two 32-bit processors. The commander has a Sagem VS580-10 panoramic sight with gyro stabilization and a laser rangefinder. There is also a TOGS II sight with a night and thermal imaging channel. Well, to control the situation on the battlefield in the stern of the hull and on the turret in the rear, there are two wide-angle high-definition cameras.

Diesel engine. More precisely, the engines, since the first Challengers were equipped with Perkins 26.6 liter CV12 engines with a capacity of 1340 hp, and after 2010, during the modernization, the tanks were equipped with German engines (and German gearboxes) MT-883KA-500 with a capacity of 1500 forces. It is true that with relatives, that with imported engines, the Challenger is not fast. 40 km / h is the maximum speed that a tank weighing from 62 to 70 tons is capable of.

In general, the Challenger 2 does not stand out in any way from a series of other main battle tanks of our time. Tall (about 2,5 meters) and heavy are not pluses. But here it is worth remembering that historically the tank was created not for the narrow streets and light bridges of Europe, but for the desert expanses of Iran.


By the way, about Iran, more precisely, its enemy in wars and neighbor, Iraq. If the first semi-combat (or rather, political) use of the Challenger took place in Kosovo, where a British tank did not fire a single shot, then the Challenger participated in the war with Iraq in full.


A native of Yugoslavia, Bojan Tečić, who in 1990 served in the former 7th Armored Brigade of the Royal Armed Forces of Great Britain as a gunner on the Challenger 2 tank, in 2000 shared his memories of his participation in the Gulf War.

Britain then sent its entire 1st Armored Division, which consisted of two brigades and a bunch of related units, to the war with Iraq. 120 Challengers arrived in Iraq, and, importantly, the same number left for bases after the hostilities. There were losses in the tanks, but these were not Challengers, but 3 Centurions and 1 Scorpion, which cannot even be called a tank. Overall, the British lost more aircraft than tanks.

The British military (including the former Yugoslav, who became a subject of the Queen of Great Britain) used their Challengers very carefully. On the one hand, the tall design of the tank provided an acceptable view, on the other hand, it gave so many "dead" zones, especially in urban areas, that the crews were simply afraid to enter the cities.


In fact, it turned out that it is very easy to sneak up to a hefty tank within an effective shot distance from the same RPG-7 and fire this shot. The armor held, the defense coped, moreover, there were cases when the Challengers held 5-7 hits of RPG-7 grenades, but it turned out to be easier not to use these tanks in cities.

The 7th brigade operated in the area of ​​the city of Basra, where they provided support for the main infantry forces storming the city. And then it turned out that the Challenger gun is a very convenient means of shooting Iraqi T-55s from a safe distance.


Yes, in this war it was the Challenger that set the record for tank destruction - 5,1 km. But this was an isolated case.

When Iraqi tanks were detected, the British crews tried to keep a safe distance of 2-2,5 km, at which the shells of the Soviet 100-mm D-10TS gun (the base model D-10 went into mass production in 1944) did not pose a danger. Yes, the D-10TS was also equipped with a position stabilizer in two planes, but something tells us that the 120-mm gun of the 1989 adoption will be more effective than the 100-mm gun of the 1944 model.

In addition, the laser rangefinder on the British tank turned out to be very useful for this scenario. Whether the Iraqi T-55s were equipped with at least the Soviet KTD-2-2 is a question. Most likely not, since the KTD-2-2 went into production in 1986, and the events described took place in 1990, and Iraq stocked up with tanks much earlier.

There was a clash of tanks from two different eras, in which, as expected, the more modern one won. Considering that the effective firing range of the D-10TS did not exceed 1,5 km, the British tanks simply shot the Iraqi ones, as at a training ground.

Even if we accept the tendency of all the military in reports to exaggerate their victories, say, by half, then even in this case, removing half of the destroyed Iraqi T-55s from the total number announced by the command of the British 1st Armored Division, then 150 tanks is a very decent figure . In general, the British reported more than 300 destroyed and captured enemy tanks.

Techich himself spoke very modestly about his victories. That is, he sometimes observed a hit in an enemy tank, but if there was no detonation of ammunition with external special effects, then it was difficult to draw a conclusion about the destruction.

In general, the Soviet T-55s were not worthy rivals for the Challenger.


Yes, not so big, faster and more maneuverable, but with a very weak gun, unable to penetrate the armor of a British tank at distances greater than 1 km. And in close combat, as you understand, the British were not eager.

That is why victories looked so impressive against the background of losses. But there's nothing you can do about it, and it's so clear that if the Iraqi T-55s had acted from ambushes in the forest belts, the alignment for the Challengers could have been completely different. But since there were no forest belts in the desert expanses of Iraq, nothing prevented the British tanks from overshooting the Iraqi ones without much difficulty.

In general, the Challenger proved to be a very strong machine, not afraid of the RPG-7, which was so adored in all the armies of the Middle East. Of course, the stories and evidence that the machines withstood more than 10 hits from the RPG-7 can be safely classified as wartime tales (in the annals stories there was a battle where the Challenger withstood 14 RPG hits and 1 from the Milan ATGM), but in the end the Challenger was not lost, which indicates both the decent characteristics of the machine and the competent use in terms of tactics.


The first official loss of the Challenger occurred in Iraq, but during a completely different operation, on the night of March 24, 2003. The crew of a British tank, moving along the route, noticed a certain "bunker" located on the side of the road. Having notified the command of a possible obstacle, the crew commander requested permission to open fire, and this permission was granted. The "bunker" was opened fire from a cannon. From the second projectile, the target was hit, as evidenced by a strong explosion.

The whole problem was that the role of the "DOT" was played not only by the same "Challenger", but also from the same unit, it was just sent on patrol a few hours earlier.


Probably, the British tankers were very surprised when they began to fly into the stern. But the fact is that the second shell turned out to be fatal, the ammunition partially detonated and claimed the lives of two crew members.

In 2007, the Challenger was completely disabled by a land mine planted on the road.

Such frankly small losses can be explained by the upgrades that were carried out in relation to all the Challenger tanks that were sent to fight in Iraq. ROMOR dynamic protection units and anti-cumulative screens were added to the Dorchester armor, which also protected the bottom of the front of the tank. However, when a high-explosive charge of great strength was detonated, even this was not enough.

In order to remedy the situation, another set of upgrades was developed, called the "Streetfighter". That is, based on the name, the modernization was supposed to improve the protection of the tank in urban battles. New side screens and overhead armor blocks from Rafael Advanced Defense Systems were developed, and dynamic protection blocks on the lower armor plate, which just covers the driver, were replaced with Dorchester armor blocks.

As a kind of intermediate result: the history of the combat use of the Challenger 2, let's say, is not extensive enough to make clear and far-reaching conclusions. British designers, perhaps, can be congratulated: the car turned out to be strong, the crew always has a chance of salvation, no matter what they fly into the Challenger. The tank, of course, is heavy, hence not fast.

But we can conclude that the success of using the Challenger mainly depends on the literacy and training of the crew once and the understanding of the command of the nuances of the application - two.

And now the Challengers will go to fight as part of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. What layouts can be here?


In fact, tank duels, which a year ago were considered an anachronism (“Tanks do not fight tanks!” Many experts said), are completely commonplace in the war in Ukraine. And therefore, the Challengers have a small chance of meeting Russian tanks (due to the small number of vehicles supplied), but there is. It is clear that after the first 14 tanks, the Armed Forces of Ukraine may receive some more, fortunately, the British need to put the second Challenger somewhere, because work on the third is on the way. And the fact that 227 Challengers will not go to Ukraine, since charity is a consignment note, you must understand that the use of the Challenger-2 in the battles in Ukraine is a decent advertisement that will allow you to shove the remaining tanks into all sorts of Omans and Jordans. For money, of course.

The fact that the Challenger can easily cope with the T-62M is understandable. Most likely, the T-72B3 will also have problems with this tank, the question is where and how to use it.

The L30 gun will give a great advantage when firing from closed positions (which is clowning in the performance of tanks with smoothbore guns), when firing at targets at long distances (and they are in abundance in the steppes of southern Ukraine), but will lose in close combat. Automatic loaders of Russian guns from 2A46 to 2A82 easily provide a rate of fire of 8-12 rounds per minute, while the three-component manual loading of the British gun (given that the components are at different angles) is unlikely to be able to provide faster loading.

It has been verified that the AZ of Russian tanks takes an average of 4 to 5 seconds to reload the gun. Manual loading of the Challenger starts from 8 seconds and continues depending on the degree of training of the loader and the degree of his fatigue. According to our tank expert Aleksey Kuznetsov, loading a tank into which a couple of shells have landed, no matter whether armor-piercing or fragmentation, will reload his gun in no less than 30 seconds.

That is, our T-90 will be able to “buy” a British colleague at least 4 times in response to 1 shot. It's a lot. This means that at close range, the Challenger simply will not have a chance.

Now the question is what is "close range". We discard all the numbers in the official data and stop at this: 2,2 km. This is the distance up to which our smoothbore guns can be guaranteed to deal damage. Further already everything, further a fantasy and luck. Up to 2,2 km, Russian shells will be able to use all or almost all, but with 2,3 km, the British, fired from rifled barrels, will rule the ball.

Of course, the T-90 from a distance of 5,1 km, as the T-55 was hit, cannot be penetrated. Wrong tank from the word "absolutely". But from 2,3 to 4 km - there are certain concerns here and they can be easily realized.

As for dynamic maneuvering, then the battlefield is behind our tank.


Still, a difference of 10 tons (or maybe more, the Challenger fully “packed” in defense weighs under 70 tons) is a lot. Yes, in the sands of Iraq or Iran, this would not be so significant, but in the south of Ukraine, soaked with spring (autumn, summer) rains, this difference in weight does not play in favor of the British car. We are talking about bridges.

Despite a slightly weaker engine, the Russian tank is faster, which will also give certain advantages.

In general, the Challenger, if used correctly, it will become a very serious opponent. Here, of course, a lot depends on the command and on the training of the crew. And vice versa, if mistakes are made, this tank can very easily turn into a target.

This applies to the Russian T-90 to the same extent.
Author:
163 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Bolt cutter
    Bolt cutter 25 January 2023 05: 13
    +25

    Gap between turret and hull. By the way, the thickness of the overhead armor elements of the tower is about the same as a cigarette pack along the thickness. The shoulder strap of the tower does not completely cover - it is clear that the edges below are a couple of centimeters thick

    Red handle (in a niche in front of the tank hull) - starts the inert gas fire extinguishing system.
    Front hatch - sewerage (!). The fact is that the crew can stay in the tank for more than a day, as the guide, who was the commander of the Chieftain tank at one time, explained to me.
    This Challenger stands at the entrance to the Newcastle Museum, equipped with Dorchester armor.
    1. Graz
      Graz 25 January 2023 05: 26
      +5
      there now seems to be a package of dz on the NLD, because the place was quite large and vulnerable, the armor is only 80mm
      1. umah
        umah 26 January 2023 10: 39
        +3
        We discard all the numbers in the official data and stop at this: 2,2 km. This is the distance up to which our smoothbore guns can be guaranteed to deal damage.

        If we take all the capabilities of tanks, then it would be fair to mention the Reflex ATGM used by the T-72, T-80 and T-90. Destruction range ~ 5 km
        1. newtc7
          newtc7 26 January 2023 12: 25
          +1
          Quote: umah
          We discard all the numbers in the official data and stop at this: 2,2 km. This is the distance up to which our smoothbore guns can be guaranteed to deal damage.

          If we take all the capabilities of tanks, then it would be fair to mention the Reflex ATGM used by the T-72, T-80 and T-90. Destruction range ~ 5 km


          It seems that they do not use it due to the complexity of the calculations for shooting. There is no "fire and forget" principle at all.
          1. Esso
            Esso 26 January 2023 20: 24
            +1
            For the Author, Which tank is better than the T-90 and the Challenger 2, whoever has the best crew, will win.
  2. shinobi
    shinobi 25 January 2023 05: 18
    +22
    Key phrases, quantity and proper use. Again, grenades for RPG-7 made in 1977 and a 90s tandem are different things, as the inhabitants of Odessa say. In war, as in war.
    1. Sergey028
      Sergey028 25 January 2023 06: 58
      +8
      Odessans say: "these are two big differences."
  3. YOUR
    YOUR 25 January 2023 05: 19
    +10
    Over the next two months, the Armed Forces of Ukraine should receive:
    From Italy 6 155-mm self-propelled guns PzH 2000.
    From the USA - 18 155-mm self-propelled guns "Paladin" and 36 105-mm towed howitzers.
    From the UK - 30 155-mm self-propelled guns AS-30
    From Sweden - 12 155-mm self-propelled guns "Archer".
    From Estonia - 16 155-mm towed howitzers.
    From the Czech Republic - 30 152-mm self-propelled guns "Dana".
    From the Poles - 18 122-mm self-propelled guns "Gvozdika" to equip the artillery battalion as part of a mechanized brigade.
    From Denmark - all of its 19 155-mm self-propelled guns CAESAR (changed compared to the basic French version on a larger wheeled chassis and with an increased portable ammo).
    Total: 185 guns, including 130 self-propelled guns.
    By June, Ukraine can receive 200 tanks, 80 of them during February.

    The Americans suddenly started talking about the transfer of 50 Abrams.
    So far, in such an unofficial format, the Germans have been warned that by transferring a large number of tanks over a hundred, they themselves become what Olaf is trying so hard to avoid, a party to the conflict.
    1. 28st region
      28st region 25 January 2023 05: 33
      +26
      That's right, not tanks are the main enemy, but artillery.
      Here's what Khodakovsky says
      As Khodakovsky emphasized in his Telegram channel, according to statistics, about ninety percent of our losses occur as a result of the actions of enemy artillery, which is our main enemy. Field artillery systems have to be dealt with both in the course of defense and in offensive operations ..............
      ............ still not developed means of systemic destruction, capable of reaching the position of enemy artillery and hitting them with a high degree of probability of destruction. The use of currently existing types of weapons is chaotic and does not satisfy all the needs of the front, and given the low effectiveness of artillery reconnaissance, the current state of affairs does not inspire optimism.

      Tanks can be fought and will fight at close range, one way or another they will be destroyed. Not with one ATGM launch, but with two or three, artillery is another matter, and we have practically no means of reconnaissance and weapons in tactical depth. Msta is barely holding out. The maximum firing range is 29 km, for CAESAR it is 41. They shoot Excalibur guided projectiles from 23 to 60 km, according to the stories of artillerymen, our Krasnopole is 15 km maximum plus it needs laser illumination.
      That's who is hard to work with, not tanks.
    2. Mikhail Krivopalov
      Mikhail Krivopalov 25 January 2023 12: 23
      +14
      Until war is declared, any country can sell / give anything to another! And you can become a party to the conflict only after the declaration of war.
      1. YOUR
        YOUR 25 January 2023 13: 24
        0
        Due to the transfer of equipment and anti-Russian rhetoric, as well as diplomatic and other actions aimed at supporting one of the warring parties, Casus belli may arise. And then what should Germany do?
        1. barricade
          barricade 25 January 2023 20: 51
          +2
          Shelling grew the territory with Western weapons. Western target designation for the defeat of our troops. Hasn't it arrived yet? Red lines not red enough?
          1. YOUR
            YOUR 26 January 2023 03: 36
            0
            Quote from barricade
            Red lines not red enough?

            Not up to us
          2. Vincent price
            Vincent price 27 January 2023 14: 05
            0
            You were directly told: the lines are red. Where are they? Let's think about what we associate with red? Belgorod? No, Kursk? No. Kremlin walls? Bingo! Now, I'm sure everyone understands where these red lines go and what it is all about.
        2. Seal
          Seal 26 January 2023 13: 17
          +4
          Quote: YOUR
          Due to the transfer of equipment and anti-Russian rhetoric, as well as diplomatic and other actions aimed at supporting one of the warring parties, Casus belli may arise. And then what should Germany do?

          Is not a fact. During the Vietnam War, the Americans knew very well that their planes were being shot down by missiles fired from Soviet installations, which were led by Soviet specialists. I'm not talking about the war in Korea.
      2. Henri Mik
        Henri Mik 26 January 2023 10: 26
        0
        A gift can be one, but not fifty. And it's one thing to give a Rolex, another thing is an Abrams.
    3. nikon7717
      nikon7717 26 January 2023 16: 02
      0
      The Americans suddenly started talking about the transfer of 50 Abrams.

      I read about the plans for the transfer of tanks to the Armed Forces of Ukraine, I watch videos with their delivery by railway, and for almost a whole year I can’t wait for the strategic railway bridges, railway hubs on the western border of Ukraine to be destroyed. It seems that there is experience of the Second World War, but they are waiting for something, and traffic flows along the railway are working.
      1. Skeptic3
        Skeptic3 26 January 2023 17: 18
        +2
        Have you spent a whole year on pipe dreams? It's interesting how you live.
        Have you ever tried to understand why there are no strikes on supply lines? Is it purely technically possible on the required scale?
    4. 75 Sergey
      75 Sergey 26 January 2023 20: 09
      0
      And 99 not?
      Crap!
      Then we need to say that after delivering one nuclear strike, this does not count, because. once not.... times.
      And just do, up to 100 - does not count
  4. Graz
    Graz 25 January 2023 05: 21
    +10
    In general, the Challenger, if used correctly, it will become a very serious opponent. Here, of course, a lot depends on the command and on the training of the crew.

    something seems to me to be crews (as in the case of Polish crabs) there will be regular volunteers - volunteer islanders who left the British army and on tanks simply delivering humanitarian aid in the form of bottled water and dry rations, and evacuating back old women who are offended by evil Russians who left them homeless
    1. old
      old 25 January 2023 05: 53
      -17
      Regardless of the training of the crew, there will be 14 of them per 10 km of the front ..
      1. Bacha
        Bacha 25 January 2023 06: 17
        +9
        Sorry, but the distance from Kaliningrad to Vladivostok is 7359 km. Where is the 10 km front from?
        1. old
          old 25 January 2023 07: 15
          +2
          Where is the 10 km front from?

          Ochepyatka - 1 km. At the end of December it was 000, now probably a little more
    2. Arsen1
      Arsen1 25 January 2023 12: 08
      +5
      and someone gave some kind of confirmation of the presence of Polish volunteers? in terms of, radio interception, prisoners killed, etc. otherwise the war has been going on for a year, but I have not seen such data. This is not in terms of getting to the bottom of the question, but really interesting. Since you mention this, then there is some objective data
      1. Mikhail Krivopalov
        Mikhail Krivopalov 25 January 2023 12: 24
        +9
        This is from a series of stories that non-Ukrainians have been fighting in Ukraine for a long time. No one has seen, but everyone tells
      2. Canna Steinfeldgrubber
        Canna Steinfeldgrubber 26 January 2023 00: 23
        +1
        I heard that the largest group of foreign volunteers are not Poles, but Belarusians. Poles are easier to scare than Belarusians, obviously.
      3. Skeptic3
        Skeptic3 26 January 2023 17: 22
        +3
        These tales are invented because it is a shame to lose to the Ukrainians. As if Ukrainians are second-class people. Here gentlemen from NATO in pith helmets are not so ashamed to lose.
        Usual stupid great-power chauvinism.
  5. Bolt cutter
    Bolt cutter 25 January 2023 05: 22
    +20

    Here is a tank for making tea / coffee in the tank. There are also British armored personnel carriers.

    Also this machine (bivy in slang) can be used as a fryer yes what the instructions on the cover say.
    1. dummy
      dummy 25 January 2023 06: 23
      -18
      Class! Everything is provided. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a shelf with diapers in the corner.
    2. your1970
      your1970 25 January 2023 07: 17
      +3
      Quote: Bolt Cutter
      Also, this machine (bivy in slang) can be used as a deep fryer, as the instructions on the lid say.

      Any tank becomes a deep fryer - after a high-quality penetration ...
      A situation may arise as with the "Tiger" in the Second World War - they will work from long distances and it will be necessary, as then, to try to catch them ....

      A personal question - how is the prime minister? Otherwise, somehow we don’t write much about him ...
      1. Proctologist
        Proctologist 25 January 2023 15: 17
        +6
        and by the way, are you familiar with the actual stories of the defeat of the Tigers? .. I remember that the Tiger was fat prey and they tried to write everything into their victories, by hook or by crook (like Ferdinand, who was called any self-propelled gun)? Which increased the number of successfully "stricken" (according to reports) "tigers". Again, the "tigers" lost during the retreat - including those blown up by crews, broken, blown up by mines - the attackers tried to record as struck by their fire. This applies to both the USSR and the allies.

        In a tank duel, the Tiger was an extremely difficult target. I assume that the Challenger will be the same.
  6. Alexey Alekseev_5
    Alexey Alekseev_5 25 January 2023 05: 29
    -2
    In general, the bulk of Iraqi tanks were knocked out by helicopters. But the losses of Abrams and other armored vehicles amounted to almost 900 units. Who knocked them out is a great secret.
    1. svp67
      svp67 25 January 2023 05: 51
      +8
      Quote: Alexey Alekseev_5
      Who knocked them out is a great mystery.

      A very great merit in this ATGM "TOU" installed on the BMP "Bradley"
    2. Negro
      Negro 25 January 2023 08: 28
      +23
      Quote: Alexey Alekseev_5
      But the loss of Abrams and other armored vehicles amounted to almost 900 units.

      )))
      Konashenkov was then in Iraq on a business trip?
      1. Proud
        Proud 27 January 2023 21: 00
        0
        By the way, Konashenkov even conservatively underestimates the losses of Ukrainians in armored vehicles. Estimates by Western military experts (RMOD, MilitaryLand, SouthFront, VT) on the loss of equipment of the Armed Forces of Ukraine from December 1, 22 to January 25, 2023: Tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and other armored vehicles - 731. Konashenkov has 500+
    3. Nesvoy
      Nesvoy 25 January 2023 17: 17
      +7
      Abrams losses for 2 Iraqi companies amounted to only about 4 dozen vehicles. Think about it.
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 26 January 2023 01: 31
        +1
        Quote: Alexey Alekseev_5
        But the loss of Abrams and other armored vehicles amounted to almost 900 units.

        Quote from Nesvoy
        Abrams losses for 2 Iraqi companies amounted to only about 4 dozen vehicles. Think about it.

        And the truth is somewhere among these numbers (40 - 900)
      2. AlexWar
        AlexWar 26 January 2023 08: 23
        -1
        It is necessary to hit the bridges and no abrams will get anywhere. Well, at least partially defeat the bridges so that they are afraid to let tanks through them
  7. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 25 January 2023 05: 47
    +18
    while removing all restrictions on the speed of the projectile, which can exceed 1000 m / s.
    Error, the speed limit for the projectile is just one of the disadvantages of cumulative ammunition.

    But depleted uranium scrap dispersed in a grooved barrel is also a rather weighty argument.
    Comparable to our Mango-M, but very expensive.

    The commander has a Sagem VS580-10 panoramic sight with gyro stabilization and a laser rangefinder. There is also a TOGS II sight with a night and thermal imaging channel.
    The commander does not have his own thermal imager, but can use the thermal imager of the main sight. Not the most advanced solution, for sure.

    Yes, in this war it was the Challenger that set the record for tank destruction - 5,1 km. But this was an isolated case.
    Almost the whole company fired, hitting not from the first shot is a pure freebie.

    the second shell was fatal, the ammunition partially detonated and claimed the lives of two crew members.
    Well, no matter how much the separate ammunition rack helped.

    when firing from closed positions (which in the performance of tanks with smoothbore guns is clowning)
    Waste - as usual from "poverty", but why clowning? Even if you believe in the lower accuracy (and this is not so) of smooth barrels, then the 125 mm HE shell is still an argument.

    Up to 2,2 km, Russian shells will be able to do everything or almost everything, but with 2,3 km, British ones fired from rifled barrels will rule the ball.
    Where, from which experts, is there confidence in the lower accuracy of a smooth barrel? The shells are full-bodied, which means heavy, yes, with stabilizers, but not like RPG grenades, but with short and powerful tails. So after all, very few people know, when fired, the shells are already TWISTING in the barrel!, which means that the influence of the eccentricity of the plumage is removed! Well, for a snack, the English crowbars are as feathered as the Russian ones, which means they behave in exactly the same way on the trajectory.


    In general, the Challenger, if used correctly, it will become a very serious opponent. Here, of course, a lot depends on the command and on the training of the crew. And vice versa, if mistakes are made, this tank can very easily turn into a target.
    This applies to the Russian T-90 to the same extent.
    This applies to any weapon, but other things being equal, the T-90 is preferable, and there will be more of them on the line.
    1. svp67
      svp67 25 January 2023 08: 40
      +7
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      Error

      Yes, it’s better not to disassemble this article from a technical point of view, it’s a pity that someone will read and believe.
      By the way, I was especially amused by the opus about KS stabilizers ...
      Therefore, it is better to stabilize normal cumulative shells in flight not by rotation, but by folding plumage, and for this a smooth barrel is just better.

      They are just designed to make the projectile spin during the flight, but this has a bad effect on the formation of a cumulative pestle, but otherwise there is no need to talk about any accuracy of the projectile ... Otherwise, "spin the projectile in a" smooth "barrel and it doesn't work...
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 25 January 2023 09: 03
        +2
        Quote: svp67
        They are just designed to make the projectile spin during the flight, yes, this has a bad effect on the formation of a cumulative pestle, but otherwise there is no need to talk about any accuracy of the projectile

        But the rotation speed is many times less than when twisting with rifling. So it's tolerable. hi
        1. svp67
          svp67 25 January 2023 13: 31
          +1
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          But the rotation speed is many times less than when twisting with rifling. So it's tolerable.

          Everything is known in comparison hi
          You have to choose "the lesser of the evils ..."
    2. Submariner971
      Submariner971 25 January 2023 21: 24
      0
      As for more of them than Challengers, perhaps. But if you count all the arriving Leopards and Abrams, it’s unlikely!
  8. svp67
    svp67 25 January 2023 05: 49
    +16
    T-90 vs Challenger 2: who has a better chance?
    The one who will have better intelligence and a trained crew
    The tank was supposed to become an opponent of the Soviet T-64 and T-72, but already at the level of models it became clear that the T-64 could not be caught up. There was no need to talk about the T-72 at all.
    Lord ... yes, in those days, the T-64 "winged" the T-72 "like a bull to a sheep", due to better armor and an SLA.
    1. Old tanker
      Old tanker 25 January 2023 11: 31
      +10
      Skomorokhov's articles are always from the section, I heard the ringing, but did not understand what he was talking about.
      1. spirit
        spirit 25 January 2023 15: 11
        0
        The one who will have better intelligence and a trained crew

        Drones are already being developed for new tank concepts. It would be nice to develop a module with a Drone, for a makeshift installation right at the front. That would be the case!
  9. Krilion
    Krilion 25 January 2023 05: 59
    +10
    if the Kremlin inmates do not pull their finger out of the ass on which they are sitting evenly, then the Ukrainians will soon be supplied with nuclear weapons ... if Putin really wants to win and not wash Russia with blood, then it is high time to declare war and general mobilization, so that as soon as possible end this massacre ... as I understand it, this war, which is shamefully called NVO (apparently because they want to continue trading with the enemy and pay money for oil transit, etc.), will continue at the same pace until Ukrainians will not receive weapons that make it possible to strike at the Kremlin ... otherwise no one will wake up there ..
    1. Mikhail Krivopalov
      Mikhail Krivopalov 25 January 2023 13: 03
      +8
      Well, it’s beneficial for everyone, for some, gas and oil have risen in price (it seems like Lukoil supplied fuel to ukram through the Bulgarian daughter), for others, the capitalization of the military industry has grown by 22% (in particular, Lockheed Martin has risen in price by 42%, Rhine Metal has generally risen by 122%). Real guys are all right, but the fate of ordinary people like you and me, who ever worried?
  10. Dilettante grandfather
    Dilettante grandfather 25 January 2023 06: 00
    +8
    That is, our T-90 will be able to “buy” a British colleague at least 4 times in response to 1 shot. It's a lot. This means that at close range, the Challenger simply will not have a chance.

    You still have to get closer. Yes, our tanks are fast, but the situation is about the same as the T-34 against the Tiger. The Germans, judging by the memoirs of veterans, were not eager to attack the Pz-Vl. We stood in our positions and fired at our vehicles. And in order to be guaranteed to hit the "Tiger", the T-34 (not to be confused with the T-34-85!) Had to approach a distance of 300-500 meters, moreover, to the sides or stern of a German tank. Now the distance has changed, but the essence remains the same. Slow, heavily armored Challengers are clearly not suitable for attack: they will make too good a target. But standing somewhere in caponiers, with a tower sticking out, and firing - this is the very thing for them.
    I don't think our guys don't realize it. Therefore, they will destroy enemy tanks based on the situation. Artillery, anti-tank systems, aviation. My opinion is that it is better not to get involved in tank duels if it is possible to avoid them.
    1. Sergey Aleksandrovich
      Sergey Aleksandrovich 25 January 2023 11: 02
      +2
      I would like to remind you that the T-90 and even the T-62M have ATGMs launched through the barrel, and it is with them that they will work at long distances.
      1. Old tanker
        Old tanker 25 January 2023 11: 34
        +8
        Do you know cases of their application in Ukraine? They may have been, but they were rare. So this moment can be skipped.
    2. Curt
      Curt 25 January 2023 12: 28
      +1
      our own tanks have a rocket from the barrel of a tank launched at 5 km just for such a case. or I'm wrong?
      1. sifgame
        sifgame 25 January 2023 14: 13
        +2
        Make no mistake here is an article on this topic https://topwar.ru/33688-otechestvennye-tankovye-rakety-i-snaryady.html
        And there are also helicopters with Attack and Whirlwind.
    3. PROXOR
      PROXOR 25 January 2023 12: 59
      -2
      Quote: Grandfather is an amateur
      The Germans, judging by the memoirs of veterans, were not eager to attack the Pz-Vl.

      Correctly. The tiger could not conduct a maneuverable battle, and therefore the manner of battle was like that of modern NATO MBTs. In general, for the most part, MBT is more like a tank destroyer than a full-fledged tank. More or less in terms of mobility and the ability to conduct a maneuverable battle, it corresponds to Lepa2. Well, Nemchura learned the lessons of WWII. But with all this, shooting on the move remains the Achilles heel of NATO tanks. A rate of fire of 4-5 seconds when using nigra JO is possible only on the spot. In the movement along the crossroads, 4-5 seconds easily turn into 10.
    4. Mikhail Krivopalov
      Mikhail Krivopalov 25 January 2023 13: 30
      +5
      Heavy western tanks were created with the main task of occupying key points and holding back the "Soviet Hordes" of numerically superior tanks rushing to the west.
      1. Skeptic3
        Skeptic3 26 January 2023 17: 28
        +2
        And now they have the opportunity to be used exactly in the scenario for which they were developed.
    5. Havoc
      Havoc 25 January 2023 14: 02
      0
      Quote: Grandfather is an amateur
      That is, our T-90 will be able to “buy” a British colleague at least 4 times in response to 1 shot. It's a lot. This means that at close range, the Challenger simply will not have a chance.

      You still have to get closer. Yes, our tanks are fast, but the situation is about the same as the T-34 against the Tiger. The Germans, judging by the memoirs of veterans, were not eager to attack the Pz-Vl. We stood in our positions and fired at our vehicles. And in order to be guaranteed to hit the "Tiger", the T-34 (not to be confused with the T-34-85!) Had to approach a distance of 300-500 meters, moreover, to the sides or stern of a German tank. Now the distance has changed, but the essence remains the same. Slow, heavily armored Challengers are clearly not suitable for attack: they will make too good a target. But standing somewhere in caponiers, with a tower sticking out, and firing - this is the very thing for them.
      I don't think our guys don't realize it. Therefore, they will destroy enemy tanks based on the situation. Artillery, anti-tank systems, aviation. My opinion is that it is better not to get involved in tank duels if it is possible to avoid them.

      A tank standing in a caponier is an excellent target, you don’t take into account that during the Second World War there were no drones, no high-precision ammunition. Today, armored vehicles must be constantly on the move, or they will be destroyed.
    6. cat Rusich
      cat Rusich 25 January 2023 21: 55
      +2
      Quote: Grandfather is an amateur
      . But standing somewhere in caponiers, with a tower sticking out, and firing - this is the very thing for them.
      I don't think our guys don't realize it. Therefore, they will destroy enemy tanks based on the situation. Artillery, anti-tank systems, aviation. My opinion is that it is better not to get involved in tank duels if it is possible to avoid them.
      Then you need - through the UAV, completely control the necessary squares of the area, and direct high-precision projectiles or hit tanks with ATGMs directly from the UAV
  11. Wildcat
    Wildcat 25 January 2023 06: 04
    +7
    Manual loading of the Challenger starts from 8 seconds and continues depending on the degree of training of the loader and the degree of his fatigue.

    If you look closely, then somehow the loader does not get very tired and does 3 shots in 15, IMHO, seconds calmly.


    We discard all the numbers in the official data and stop at this: 2,2 km. This is the distance up to which our smoothbore guns can be guaranteed to deal damage. Further already everything, further a fantasy and luck. Up to 2,2 km, Russian shells will be able to do everything or almost everything, but with 2,3 km, British ones fired from rifled barrels will rule the ball.
    Of course, the T-90 from a distance of 5,1 km, as the T-55 was hit, cannot be penetrated. Wrong tank from the word "absolutely". But from 2,3 to 4 km - there are certain concerns here and they can be easily realized.

    Neither the US nor the South Caucasus are worried about our shells.
    About shooting at 2,2 km. Here a technical question arises not even about penetration, but about the possibility of hits (too lazy to drag everything, here is the link https://rostislavddd.livejournal.com/438619.html)
    Well, that is, they are disturbing, but "it's a fun game of random scattering of projectiles": "In 1999, captured T-90s and T-80s showed their inability to penetrate the front of the M1A1 turret from 500 meters with any ammunition available at that time.
    Conversely, the old M829A2 had little difficulty doing the same up to 3500m. The M1 has better sights and fire control than the T80. In a duel at any range, I would bet on M1 every time.
    The T80's only chance is to sneak up and give a good side or back shot to the M1.
    When I served in the Foreign Technology Assessment Group (from the mid-90s to 2001), we had a new Russian T-90 .... 5 really new 3BM48 depleted uranium shells were delivered, again details of how and when they were acquired were not reported.
    The T-80 we had was handed over to us by the British MoD before I joined the team. It's no secret, they bought it through a front company and when it was made public in typical British fashion they casually told the world it was true.
    ...
    T80 and T90, respectively, absolutely could not penetrate the front of the M1A1 turret from 500 m.
    The M829A2 had problems with the T-90 armor when the dynamic protection package was activated at a distance of more than 3200 m (in fact, we did not fire on the T-90, the turret was cut and its armor was reproduced [on the layout], probably better than the original.
    Hitting an M1 with a T-90 at over 2500 meters is a fun game of random projectile dispersion.
    "https://rostislavddd.livejournal.com/362980.html

    A short interview with a Challenger 2 tanker: "What do you think about turbines and autoloaders? I don't really have a personal opinion or experience with them, but the Russians have been using them for a long time and I've heard that they tear anything you put in front of them, including body parts.
    I have always been told that the British Army prefers the human loader because the autoloader is unreliable, while the human loader can "fight in the tank" and potentially solve problems that are much more difficult to solve with an autoloader or a turbine
    ." The link is more interesting: https://rostislavddd.livejournal.com/455489.html

    And some educational video from the British Tank Museum:



    1. blackice
      blackice 25 January 2023 07: 00
      +9
      As an advertisement, you can file any video, including one where the loader with one of his views will suppress the enemy’s weapons. In fact, the fight is not the ideal place for advertising. A tank standing in a caponier is a target for artillery or a drone. Yes, and there are no such evennesses in Ukraine as in the deserts. And the soil is really such that the British will have to make separate roads
      So it's too early to draw conclusions.
    2. your1970
      your1970 25 January 2023 08: 07
      +7
      Quote: Wildcat
      If you look closely, then somehow the loader does not get very tired and does 3 shots in 15, IMHO, seconds calmly.

      On the TRAINING(!) firing from 152 mm 2С3 being loaded from the ground - by the 10th shot of quick shooting, the arms lengthen to the knees feel .With calm measured shooting - a projectile to 25-30 lol
      Naturally, in battle, their adrenaline will go off scale. However, I saw both a sharp acceleration and a sharp slowdown - everything will depend on the person
      Let's wait and see how they shoot ..
      1. Wildcat
        Wildcat 25 January 2023 11: 15
        +7
        IMHO, but the loader has only 47 separate loading shots. Charges 3-7kg. somewhere, IMHO shells are easier request will be than 152 mm2С3 ...
        1. Old tanker
          Old tanker 25 January 2023 11: 41
          0
          Charges 3-7kg

          Why are you ignoring the weight of the projectile?
          1. Wildcat
            Wildcat 25 January 2023 13: 02
            +4
            There is no time to search. I quickly found it by the charges, I had to dig into the shells.
            IMHO, a 120 mm projectile will be lighter than a 152 mm one.
    3. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 25 January 2023 08: 55
      +6
      Quote: Wildcat
      If you look closely, then somehow the loader does not get very tired and does 3 shots in 15, IMHO, seconds calmly.
      And if you take a closer look, the loader always holds the projectile in his hands before firing, and does not take it from the ammo rack, and he also obviously takes the charge from some kind of quick access clamp, and not from an armored container (hello to survivability!), Plus I forgot to close the safety shield (mistake! ). Well, you also know that he wields a relatively light crowbar, and not an HE or HASH projectile. But pro, don't say anything.

      Quote: Wildcat
      Neither the US nor the South Caucasus are worried about our shells.
      Well, a "pleasant" surprise is not ruled out here, although yes, it will be for Khikhlov. And where did you see the serenity of the Angles? Although arrogance they all do not take. But the Germans, for example, briskly from 2A4 to 2A5 and then began to translate their Leos, because they actually worked with the GDR T-72s.
      Quote: Wildcat
      "In 1999, the captured T-90 and T-80
      Oh, these storytellers ... laughing Well, okay T-80, but where did they capture the T-90? Although the T-72B 89 (we are talking about it) is comparable in armor to the T-90 with a cast turret, but then there is no further. And the condition of the guns is also unknown.

      Quote: Wildcat
      About shooting at 2,2 km. Here a technical question arises, not even about breaking through, but about the possibility of hits (too lazy to drag everything
      Well, it’s right that you don’t drag it, there the author thinks so strangely that questions arise about his literacy. Something like to you, because the possibility and probability of hitting are very different things. Yes, and a maximum of 2A46M is mentioned there.

      Quote: Wildcat
      and I heard they tear anything you put in front of them, including body parts... ...because the autoloader is unreliable
      It's fun to watch how charging forgets push safety shield, this is about the reliability and safety of the gun.

      But, of course, you shouldn’t shove this bandura head on, even on the Breakthrough.
      1. Wildcat
        Wildcat 25 January 2023 11: 06
        +7
        Oh, those storytellers... laughing Well, okay T-80, but where did they get the T-90? Although the T-72B 89 (we are talking about it) is comparable in armor to the T-90 with a cast turret, but then there is no further. And the condition of the guns is also unknown.

        https://topwar.ru/167752-v-seti-pojavilos-foto-rossijskogo-tanka-v-ssha-chto-jeto-mozhet-znachit.html
        https://rg.ru/2022/05/26/tank-t-90-zametili-na-odnoj-iz-avtomobilnyh-trass-v-ssha.html
        They slander that the last time a trophy was from Syria, but it is impossible to exclude "fraternal Iraq", which the T90 recently bought.
        And before that, somewhere spionerili, it seems.

        Well, it’s right that you don’t drag it, there the author thinks so strangely that questions arise about his literacy. Something like to you, because the possibility and probability of hitting are very different things. Yes, and a maximum of 2A46M is mentioned there.

        I'm waiting for your schemes, please don't try to get rid of it with work on the topic "what is the difference between possibility and probability". To write about literacy is not to roll bags.

        But, of course, you shouldn’t shove this bandura head on, even on the Breakthrough.
        Every cloud has a silver lining, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are looking for another prodigy in the form of NATO tanks. For us, it was worse if instead of 14 Challengers 2, they threw another 50 Bradleys, IMHO.
        What a tank, what Bradley requires an ATGM, a mine or a 125 mm shell, and the harm from Bradley (especially if there were more of them) is much greater.
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 25 January 2023 11: 47
          0
          Quote: Wildcat
          They slander that the last time a trophy was from Syria, but it is impossible to exclude "fraternal Iraq", which the T90 recently bought.
          And before that, somewhere spionerili, it seems.

          Where is 99, and where is Syria?
          Quote: Wildcat
          I'm waiting for your schemes, please don't try to get rid of it with work on the topic "what is the difference between possibility and probability". To write about literacy is not to roll bags.
          Why are there other schemes? Enough of those in your link.

          Yes, our (old) cannon has a worse spread, of course, 41 versus 17 at 1500 m, but not fatal, but what do we see next: at three km, the spread of the German woman increased three times - 60, and ours doubled - 84. But the author stopped at 2 km for our gun. Well done that...

          Quote: Wildcat
          Here a technical question arises, not even about breaking through, but about the possibility of hits
          The possibility is either there, or it is not at all, but the probability is almost always there! And now the probability of hitting from an old cannon with very old shells is three km lower for ours than for a German, but not fatal.
          1. Wildcat
            Wildcat 25 January 2023 13: 14
            +4
            Where is 99, and where is Syria?

            Once again: "the last time a trophy from Syria, but "fraternal Iraq", which the T90 recently bought, cannot be ruled out.
            And before that, they spioned somewhere, it seems.

            I gave links, go through them.

            1999 is the one that the American tanker writes about. The tank in the tests was under fire and the tower was "opened" for it.
            2022 is already a different tank, it even has a turret intact. The Russian newspaper writes that this is possibly a trophy from Syria from Syrian tankers. My IMHO - why chase a tank across Syria if there are fresh T90s in Iraq? Iraq, which is 100% dependent on the United States, IMHO, would not refuse such a favor, just one tank ... And the United States would very much like to look at the fresh T90.

            Why are there other schemes? Enough of those in your link.
            .....
            There is either a possibility, or it is not at all, but the probability is almost always there!
            Well, yes, this is not tossing bags.
            1. Vladimir_2U
              Vladimir_2U 25 January 2023 15: 56
              -3
              Quote: Wildcat
              I gave links, go through them.
              Hello, the first reference about accuracy and armor penetration mentions 1999.
              Quote: Wildcat
              "In 1999, captured T-90s and T-80s showed their inability to penetrate the front of the M1A1 turret from 500 meters with any ammunition available at that time.


              Quote: Wildcat
              2022 is already a different tank, it even has a turret intact. The Russian newspaper writes that this is possibly a trophy from Syria from Syrian tankers.
              You don’t understand that, do you just read your links yourself?
              Judging by the published photographs, we are talking about the most original, already outdated version of the "ninetieth" - the model of the 1992 model. For example, you can see the caterpillar tracks characteristic of it, similar to those used on the T-72.

              https://rg.ru/2022/05/26/tank-t-90-zametili-na-odnoj-iz-avtomobilnyh-trass-v-ssha.html

              Quote: Wildcat
              Well, yes, this is not tossing bags.
              You were poked into your illiteracy at your own link, and this is the answer. It’s clear, it’s stupid to copy-paste, it’s not for you to understand numbers.
              1. Wildcat
                Wildcat 25 January 2023 17: 48
                +3
                Hello, the first reference about accuracy and armor penetration mentions 1999.

                Hello, can I call an adult?

                Let's start the lesson on mastering the count to two:

                1999: "The M829A2 had problems with the T-90 armor when the dynamic protection package was activated at a distance of more than 3200 m (in fact, we did not fire on the T-90, the turret was cut and its armor was reproduced [on the layout], probably better than the original."

                2022: "On one of the highways in Texas, an unusual tank for the United States was spotted, painted in the color of the desert. "- this tank is intact, carefully look at the photo.

                That is it two different tanks.

                You were poked into your illiteracy at your own link, and this is the answer. It’s clear, it’s stupid to copy-paste, it’s not for you to understand numbers.
                Before "poking into illiteracy", try to master the count to two. If possible, learn the difference between the concepts of "number" and "number". And if you still manage to coordinate the words in sentences: "You were poked into your illiteracy through your own link, and this is the answer," then you can stop "tossing bags."
                1. Comet
                  Comet 25 January 2023 23: 38
                  0
                  Quote: Wildcat
                  1999: "... (in fact, we did not fire at the T-90, the turret was cut and its armor was reproduced [on the layout], probably better than the original."

                  That is, they did not have a T-90. An unverified and non-validated layout was used.
                2. Comet
                  Comet 25 January 2023 23: 40
                  -1
                  Quote: Wildcat
                  2022: "An unusual tank for the United States, painted in the color of the desert, was spotted on one of the highways in Texas." - this tank is intact, carefully look at the photo.

                  This is not a T-90
                3. Vladimir_2U
                  Vladimir_2U 26 January 2023 03: 58
                  0
                  Quote: Wildcat
                  That is, these are two different tanks.

                  These are two different, but at the same time two equally OLD tanks, and besides, the difference between the "trophies" is 20 years! Your link, in which the numbers did not reach you, mentions the years 99-01 and the T-90 tank, which is not a fact that the T-90, but is identical in armor, but since then the amers have had nothing newer
                  Quote: Wildcat
                  Well, okay T-80, but where did they capture the T-90? Although the T-72B 89 (we are talking about it) is comparable in armor to the T-90 with a cast turret, but then no more. And the condition of the guns is also unknown.
                  I poke you once again in your own link, if you still do not "understand"
                  Quote: Vladimir_2U
                  Judging by the published photographs, we are talking about the very original, an already outdated version of the "ninetieth" - a 1992 model. For example, the caterpillar tracks characteristic of it are visible, similar to those used on the T-72.
                  https://rg.ru/2022/05/26/tank-t-90-zametili-na-odnoj-iz-avtomobilnyh-trass-v-ssha.html

                  You work very well under the idiotic. I didn’t write that this is one tank, I wrote that amers didn’t have the first sample with a cast turret newer than the T-90.

                  Quote: Wildcat
                  Before "poking into illiteracy", try to master the count to two. If possible, learn the difference between the concepts of "number" and "number".
                  A number is a symbol with which numbers are written, and now you don’t even understand numbers, well, or you don’t try.
                  And yes, not in mathematics, but in Russian the word "digit" can be synonymous with the word "number", depending on the context. But keep going like this...
            2. Comet
              Comet 25 January 2023 23: 44
              0
              Quote: Wildcat
              2022 is already a different tank, it even has a turret intact. The Russian newspaper writes that this is possibly a trophy from Syria from Syrian tankers. My IMHO - why chase a tank across Syria if there are fresh T90s in Iraq? Iraq, which is 100% dependent on the United States, IMHO, would not refuse such a favor, just one tank ... And the United States would very much like to look at the fresh T90.

              In Iraq and Syria - T-90S.
        2. Negro
          Negro 25 January 2023 17: 44
          +2
          Quote: Wildcat
          Every cloud has a silver lining, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are looking for another prodigy in the form of NATO tanks

          The APU is trying to make the most of the technological advantage it has. The former brothers, as if they were in OUR fairy tale, didn’t do a damn thing for 30 years - and suddenly everything at once and for free, simply because they are cool.
          Quote: Wildcat
          It was worse for us if, instead of 14 Challengers 2, another 50 Bradleys were thrown to them

          It does not interfere.
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 26 January 2023 10: 10
            0
            Quote: Negro
            The former brothers, as if they were in OUR fairy tale, didn’t do a damn thing for 30 years - and suddenly everything at once and for free, simply because they are cool.

            This is not a fairy tale, but a national idea. wink

            In short, everything is like in a hymn:
            Shche ne vmerla Ukrainy i slava, i volya.
            Shche nam, brattya molodiyi, usmikhnetsya dolya.
            Zgynut nashi vorizhenky, yak rosa na sontsi.
            Zapanu im i mi, brotherly, at his side.

            Why do something, if something happens - and fate will smile, and the enemies will perish like dew in the sun. smile
            1. Negro
              Negro 26 January 2023 12: 14
              +1
              Quote: Alexey RA
              Why do something, if something happens - and fate will smile, and the enemies will perish like dew in the sun.

              I have to point out that you have just issued the plan for the Special Military Operation of February last year. Stay where you are, they've already left for you.

              My comment concerned exclusively the features of rearmament to NATO standards. Others would have to work for 8 years and spend money, and these NATO standards fly into their mouths.
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 26 January 2023 19: 19
                +1
                Quote: Negro
                I have to point out that you have just issued the plan for the Special Military Operation of February last year. Stay where you are, they've already left for you.

                Nah, the February NWO plan was different. He roughly repeated the pre-war Soviet scenario of the Soviet-Finnish War - well, the one where the exploited classes, when the Red Army approaches, break their chains, turn their bayonets and overthrow the exploiters in order to live happily in the Soviet socialist republic. smile
                A lot of lies over the years
                To confuse Finnish Ukrainian people.
                Open now trustingly to us
                Halves of the wide gate!

                Neither the jesters nor the fools scribblers
                Do not embarrass your hearts anymore.
                They took away your homeland more than once -
                We come to return it.
                1. Negro
                  Negro 27 January 2023 08: 32
                  +1
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  He roughly repeated the pre-war Soviet scenario of the Soviet-Finnish War

                  It's the same plan. He is the only one.
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  Open now trustingly to us
                  Halves of the wide gate!

                  Hm. Grandfathers expressed themselves floridly. The poetry (and prose) of the Russian world is more straightforward. Despite my attempts to popularize the work of D.A. Medvedev, apparently only two great texts will remain from the CWO. The first is "When the Russian army appears at the front in front of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, it will be easy to understand." The second - "As if ??? ?????????? in ???? ?????? (The Russian army entered Ukraine)".
                  1. Wildcat
                    Wildcat 27 January 2023 09: 47
                    +2
                    The Russian army entered Ukraine

                    Impressive. But in general, the work of such authors looks like unrealistic and one feels the author's poor knowledge of the subject. IMHO, this is from a lack of education in general and the corresponding lessons at school in particular.
                    my attempts to popularize the work of D.A. Medvedev
                    but this, I admit, was unusual, original, even in places fascinating and realistic:
                    “Firstly, it will be very difficult. Secondly, in the event of a protracted conflict, at some point a new military alliance will form from those countries that the Americans and a pack of their castrated dogs got. This has always happened in the history of mankind during long wars. And then the States will finally throw old Europe and the remnants of the unfortunate Ukrainians, and the world will again come to a state of equilibrium.

                    Unless, of course, it's too late.
                    "
        3. Comet
          Comet 25 January 2023 23: 26
          0
          Quote: Wildcat
          https://topwar.ru/167752-v-seti-pojavilos-foto-rossijskogo-tanka-v-ssha-chto-jeto-mozhet-znachit.html
          https://rg.ru/2022/05/26/tank-t-90-zametili-na-odnoj-iz-avtomobilnyh-trass-v-ssha.html

          This is not a T-90.
          1. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr 26 January 2023 02: 32
            +1
            Quote: Comet
            This is not a T-90.

            Photo: Uralvagonzavod
            The main Russian battle tank T-90 is celebrating its anniversary: ​​exactly 30 years ago, on October 5, 1992, it was adopted by the Russian army. Its export version T-90S is operated in several countries and is the most commercially successful tank of the XNUMXst century.....
            https://rostec.ru/news/tank-t-90-otmechaet-yubiley/
            1. Comet
              Comet 26 January 2023 23: 07
              0
              Quote: Bad_gr
              Photo: Uralvagonzavod

              In the photo Uralvagonzavod - T-90, and on the American trailer with a photo from the articles of the WG and VO - not the T-90.
    4. PROXOR
      PROXOR 25 January 2023 13: 07
      -4
      Quote: Wildcat
      If you look closely, then somehow the loader does not get very tired and does 3 shots in 15, IMHO, seconds calmly.

      That's just the point 2 series of 3 shots, of which 2 shots are shooting from a place.
      Neither the US nor the South Caucasus are worried about our shells.
      About shooting at 2,2 km. Here a technical question arises, not even about breaking through, but about the possibility of hits

      Did they study 3BM-60 and 3BM-62? I doubt very much that they had such an opportunity. But they checked the impact of 3BM-42. In Iraq, the T-72A was placed at the training ground and fired two shots in the forehead. And the second crowbar pierced the abrashka. It was after this that depleted uranium armor was urgently hung on the abrashka.
      1. Negro
        Negro 25 January 2023 17: 40
        +4
        Quote: PROXOR
        In Iraq, the T-72A was placed at the training ground and fired two shots in the forehead. And the second crowbar pierced the abrashka.

        The time has come for amazing stories.
    5. Havoc
      Havoc 25 January 2023 14: 17
      0
      If you look closely, then somehow the loader does not get very tired and does 3 shots in 15, IMHO, seconds calmly.

      Well, yes, if you are at the training ground and fired 10-15 shells, and then went to drink coffee in a warm barracks. But if you sip shells for at least a week in normal combat mode, and they still need to be loaded into a tank, then it’s interesting to look at the loader breathing in powder gases. Yes, and the shells are not the same 76-85 mm and 88 mm that were during the Second World War, here the weight is much more + tandem.
  12. Ezekiel 25-17
    Ezekiel 25-17 25 January 2023 06: 15
    -6
    Do not forget about ATGMs, both on our tanks and in general.
    1. 2 Level Advisor
      2 Level Advisor 25 January 2023 07: 32
      +3
      Have you seen, at least once during the NWO, the use of ATGMs? no .. well, if the "Prokhorovka" pecks, they will probably appear in advance .. but just in battle - who and where will they be taken, someone loads them (more than once, I saw the loading of our tanks with shells and did not see ATGMs there) or give a ride? namely, in a simple battle, tanks will most likely meet by chance and the presence of ATGMs in them is unlikely, unless, of course, the meeting is scheduled ..
      1. Viktor Sergeev
        Viktor Sergeev 25 January 2023 07: 50
        -5
        I take it you are in the SVO? Or maybe you can judge by the videos what is used there? There are a lot of ATGMs there, including the Cornets, who are happy to pick open the Challenger's forehead.
        1. 2 Level Advisor
          2 Level Advisor 25 January 2023 08: 40
          +7
          I was probably incorrect, I meant precisely tank guided missile weapons.
      2. Ezekiel 25-17
        Ezekiel 25-17 25 January 2023 09: 51
        -9
        Not used, in the past tense, Ukrainian.
      3. PROXOR
        PROXOR 25 January 2023 13: 08
        -6
        And Chrysanthemums and terminators are there for the sake of appearance?
        1. Ezekiel 25-17
          Ezekiel 25-17 25 January 2023 18: 04
          -4
          Minus us or sold TsIPSO or her bots.
  13. Zug
    Zug 25 January 2023 06: 24
    0
    It will be soon, well, Ukraine, each creature in pairs.
  14. Sergey028
    Sergey028 25 January 2023 07: 06
    +7
    The novel was wrong. If we compare the T-64 and T-72 at the time of its appearance, then the T-64 was much better than the T-72. But at the same time, the T-64 was much more difficult and capricious to operate than the T-72.
    1. Viktor Sergeev
      Viktor Sergeev 25 January 2023 07: 48
      -5
      But can we consider a tank, which even could hardly reach the battlefield, is it better? T72 soldier, T64 figurine for the range.
      1. Sergey028
        Sergey028 25 January 2023 10: 55
        +5
        Viktor, if you think that the T-72 did not have childhood illnesses at the beginning of its operation, then you are deeply mistaken.
  15. Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 25 January 2023 07: 47
    -4
    The chance is greater with a helicopter or a grenade launcher. Why T90 to get into a duel with an incomprehensible outcome? Yes, and the Ukrainians will hide in their huge piece of iron, unless of course they are forced to shove in an attack to death.
  16. james
    james 25 January 2023 07: 53
    +2
    This is what drawing a redline without further implementation leads to. Nobody pays attention to them.
  17. alexey_444
    alexey_444 25 January 2023 08: 02
    0
    German tanks with good optics and elongated barrels (not 41 years old) could shoot T-34s from long distances, but life showed a different alignment, the tactics of using tanks changed. Our tanks are low, but uncomfortable for the crew, but it’s better not to be comfortable and alive than vice versa, we have always fought with strong opponents, and not like the Anglo-Saxons with the natives. In general, it’s not a shame to brag about the executions of the T-55, it’s like Western athletes take doping with the permission of the WADA. Weight, maneuverability, rate of fire are much more valuable than the firing range, I'm not even talking about battles in cities. And repairs, to transport to Europe for repairs, like the Germans from Kursk drove panthers to Germany, this is not just time, exposing sections of the front, but also the price.
    1. cat Rusich
      cat Rusich 25 January 2023 22: 39
      +2
      Quote: alexey_444
      , but life showed a different alignment, the tactics of using tanks changed. Our tanks are low, but uncomfortable for the crew, but it’s better not to be comfortable and alive than vice versa, we have always fought with strong opponents, and not like the Anglo-Saxons with the natives. .
      I recalled Crimean War 1853-56 - the British rifled guns, the Russians smoothbore guns...
      1. Proud
        Proud 27 January 2023 21: 03
        0
        The British had the same musket in service for 150 years (!) before Krymskaya. As soon as they received military-technical weapons, they immediately attacked.
  18. Dedok
    Dedok 25 January 2023 08: 24
    +8
    no matter what we write here, this is a very serious opponent, a serious one!
    yes, the crew, its training is of paramount importance, but how many well-coordinated crews do we have left after a year of NWO?
    All existing tanks have flaws, even the Merkava, but it is very difficult to take advantage of these shortcomings.
    and most importantly: this is a weapon and sighting systems - here we are completely inferior, and from here - you can work on them only with strike drones, and not very much with air / space reconnaissance, i.e. problems, serious, we are provided
    1. Old tanker
      Old tanker 25 January 2023 11: 57
      -2
      At the main ranges of tank fire - up to 2,5 km, our sighting systems are in no way inferior to Western ones.
  19. TIR
    TIR 25 January 2023 08: 27
    +5
    His rifled gun is more accurate even than that of Leopard-2. About this in the article is not a word. The initial velocity of the projectile is also I think higher. Essentially nothing is said about the gun at all.
    1. Old tanker
      Old tanker 25 January 2023 12: 07
      +5
      With a sub-caliber projectile, the accuracy is the same. But the speed of shells of smoothbore guns is higher. Less energy loss due to friction. Hence, the kinetic energy is higher, as a result, armor penetration is higher. This was the reason for the transition from rifled tank barrels to smooth ones. And not so much the problem with the torsion of cumulative shells.
      1. Foul skeptic
        Foul skeptic 25 January 2023 13: 01
        +2
        Hence, the kinetic energy is higher, as a result, armor penetration is higher.

        Western BOPS are slower and on smooth trunks than ours. And this is a conscious approach. At the same time, at a lower speed, Western BOPS have no less armor penetration. Since the latter depends on the magnitude of the specific load (transverse load), which is higher for Western BOPS.
  20. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 25 January 2023 08: 28
    +2
    As they say, rely on tanks, but don’t mess with other weapons either! But here, not everything will be all right ... Take the same "Cornet" ... How much effort has been put into getting armor penetration "will give ist fantastic"! And these "Cornets" (and "cornet-like" ...) have already managed to fight "a little" ... In principle, they proved to be a good weapon, but they did not make a "panzershrek" to modern (!) Tanks! that the bet on the "armor penetration" of tank frontal armor is not a "progressive method" now? what Once upon a time, the French proudly demonstrated a cumulative tank projectile with impressive armor penetration by those standards and a "pencil" diameter "punching" hole! How many dozens of shells must be spent to disable the tank, forcing the crew to leave the car due to drafts? The Americans, having fun with the French, nevertheless thought about it ... and as a result they began to create, albeit cumulative, but hitting equipment in the "roof", anti-aircraft ammunition! In particular, they have TOW-2B! What prevented the Russians from adding a version to the existing Kornets to destroy armored vehicles from the top? But there is no such version, which is very useful in the face of the "Abrams-leopard" threat, in the Russian troops! In the 90s, they created a semblance of NLAW "Autonomy" ... abandoned and forgotten! In the face of the threat in the form of "Abrams", "Leopards-2", "Leclercs" T-72s with old BOPS at "long" distances can only compete with the help of "Reflex" TOURs (and something like that ...), but at present the "reflexes" will be rather weak against the modern tank "arsenal" of NATO! Archi-needed TOURS that hit tanks in the "roof"! They are not here! There are only reports that it is being developed ... almost developed ... the Sokol-V TOUR has already been developed, but who saw this "falcon" in real life? Ay! Desperately needed during the "invasion" of "Leopards", "Abrams", ATGMs "Baikal", "Effect", Yermak", but they are only being developed; since earlier the RF Ministry of Defense "spit" on the 3rd generation ATGM! "Wangyu" ... in the fight against NATO tanks, Russian fighters will also have to use captured NLAWs with '' Javelins ''s! And it would be better if the "mobiles" immediately begin to master these weapons! Maybe the RF Ministry of Defense will also think about the grenade (mortar) version of the PTKM- 1R? PT-copters would also be very useful! (PS: By modern, I mean the Merkava ... And now there is a reason to compare the Merkava with the Abrams, Leopard-2, Challenger-2 " ... Maybe someone will write such an article!.....?? )
    1. agond
      agond 25 January 2023 09: 15
      0
      Most likely, the duel of the Challenger with the T-90, and the T-72 will take place not in the fields, but in urban areas at minimum distances, which increases the likelihood of hits, the difference in booking will give the Challenger an advantage, at least over the T-72 .. and in the fields, the mobility of tanks weighing 62 tons can be seriously limited by the condition of the soil,
      1. paul3390
        paul3390 25 January 2023 11: 34
        +6
        the duel of the Challenger with the T-90, and the T-72 will take place not in the fields, but in urban areas at minimum distances

        An interesting tactical formation - from both sides to drive a tank brigade into the urban area .. what It seemed to me that such commanders should be expelled from the first courses of military schools .. belay
      2. Zufei
        Zufei 25 January 2023 13: 03
        +4
        The specific ground pressure of the T-90 and Challenger 2 is comparable and is approximately 0.97 kgf / cm², depending on the modification.
        1. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 26 January 2023 02: 52
          0
          Quote: Zufei
          The specific ground pressure of the T-90 and Challenger 2 is comparable and is approximately 0.97 kgf / cm², depending on the modification.

          The pressure on the ground may be the same, but when the tank gets stuck, a difference in weight of 20 tons will make itself felt.
    2. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 25 January 2023 09: 28
      +1
      TOW-2B! What prevented the Russians from adding a version to the existing Kornets to destroy armored vehicles from the top?
      This complicates and increases the cost of the rocket. You need, at a minimum, a laser rangefinder and in the rocket itself - a magnetic target sensor ...... plus, probably, some kind of speed manipulation during approach and detonation.
      As a result, these are single options .... progress stepped over and even Javelin stepped towards Spikes ...... and ATGMs like Kornets remained relevant.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 25 January 2023 10: 49
        +1
        Quote: Zaurbek
        This complicates and increases the cost of the rocket.

        Mdaaa...! Again a "burp": "The economy should be economical", only now with a military smell? And if you turn on the "reason" and think... Moreover, against the blatant "background" of budgetary "cuts", embezzlement! Soon the Papuans will be running around with "starlinks" (if they haven't already started...), and here we are now... looking through "binoculars"! Ukro-zoldaten
        with "javelin" and enlau, and our fighters have "children" of the Faustpatron arr. 1942 Saved up! And the price of such savings is the life of our soldiers!
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 25 January 2023 11: 13
          +1
          And this too, and in the West that ATGM did not take root. On helicopters he was supplanted by Helfire, on the ground he is supplanted by Spike of different versions. In the Russian Federation, Product 305 (conceptually similar to SPIK) is still with an HE warhead. And do not forget that the anti-tank systems of our helicopters are supersonic and the control has automatic target tracking. (this compensates, or maybe exceeds the capabilities of this version of TOU-2B). Breaking through any tank not equipped with KAZ for ATGM Whirlwind and so on is not a problem.
          1. solar
            solar 25 January 2023 13: 36
            +1
            In helicopters he was supplanted by Helfire

            Javelin is a portable complex. They shoot from the hands.
  21. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 25 January 2023 09: 01
    +3
    And yet, it is desirable that the confrontation would look like: Leo, Chieftain, Abrams - Ka52M.
  22. Ingenegr
    Ingenegr 25 January 2023 09: 27
    +12
    It has been verified that the AZ of Russian tanks takes an average of 4 to 5 seconds to reload the gun.

    By whom and when checked?
    Roman, stop talking nonsense to the masses. It does not paint the publicist. The loading cycle in the AZ of domestic tanks varies greatly from the position of the cassette with the desired projectile in the VT and can reach, in the worst case, 14 seconds.
    the loader of a tank, into which a couple of shells have landed, no matter if armor-piercing or fragmentation, will reload his gun in no less than 30 seconds.

    But the AZ, after the arrival of a "pair of shells", will not work at all with a probability of at least 0.8, and the commander with the gunner will have to load the gun manually. And the rate of fire of the 2A46 gun when manually loaded - and this is a whole song, albeit a sad one - even under ideal conditions will be 1.5-2 rounds per minute.
    Whom and why does the author want to deceive? What good purpose does it serve? Unclear. You can’t fool people who know the materiel, and hanging noodles on the ears of ordinary people who are interested in the subject cannot be called a noble deed.
    And one more thing: the Challenger's predecessor was a vehicle developed as part of the MBT-80 project - Main Battle Tank of 80 - that is, the "main battle tank of the 80s", but not the MTB-80, which slips several times in a row in the text, t .e. is not a random error.
    Take care, Roman. There are a lot of frank "blunders" in your articles lately. Quantity at the expense of quality.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 25 January 2023 16: 54
      +3
      Quote: Ingenegr
      The loading cycle in the AZ of domestic tanks varies greatly from the position of the cassette with the desired projectile in the VT and can reach, in the worst case, 14 seconds.

      In the worst case, it can reach several hours - when the shots of the required type loaded into the AZ are over, and you need to crawl into cover to reload.
      The worst thing about this is that the capacity of the AZ is a multiple of that of a non-mechanized ammunition rack.
  23. certero
    certero 25 January 2023 09: 34
    +5
    I didn’t understand why a rifled gun gives an advantage when firing a sub-caliber projectile?
    In fact, smooth-bore guns on tanks appeared precisely for firing sub-caliber ones, and not at all because of the desire to use cumulative ones. The smoothbore gun made it possible to accelerate the projectile to higher speeds.
    The main thing in the supply of Western tanks is not at all their capabilities, but the fact that tankers from Western countries will go with tanks 100%. Accordingly, the conflict simply moves to another plane, sharply raising the degree of confrontation. If our politicians continue to chew snot, then there is not far from a languid war. Because only the use of atomic bombs can stop the escalation, When we see already units of Western armies in Ukraine
    1. MSN
      MSN 25 January 2023 10: 31
      0
      Advantage in shooting accuracy. And more importantly - at long distances. The maximum effective range for HESH is 8500 m. Normally so.
      1. certero
        certero 25 January 2023 18: 38
        +3
        Quote: MSN
        Advantage in shooting accuracy. And more importantly - at long distances. The maximum effective range for HESH is 8500 m. Normally so.

        The departure speed of a sub-caliber in a smooth barrel is higher. As for the accuracy at a direct shot distance, I can’t say anything, but there the circular deviation is small for both. As for the range, so far all the dueling situations that I have seen and heard have taken place at short distances - hundreds of meters. And now it will not work to stand on a high-rise and shoot like it was with tigers in the Second World War.
    2. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 25 January 2023 11: 03
      +2
      It doesn’t give .... the projectile speed is in any case less than that of a smoothbore. But the BOPS themselves in NATO are very perfect in terms of design and composition. L7 was not very bad.
      1. MSN
        MSN 25 January 2023 14: 11
        0
        L7 is still there. She won't retire soon.
  24. vindigo
    vindigo 25 January 2023 09: 46
    0
    In my opinion, it is more correct to compare the anti-tank weapons of the infantrymen and the Challenger-2 tank. Who has a better chance?
  25. PXL
    PXL 25 January 2023 10: 09
    -2
    And our tanks no longer fire missiles?
    1. Arsen1
      Arsen1 25 January 2023 12: 24
      +1
      Judging by what is happening at the front, no
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 25 January 2023 16: 57
      +5
      Quote from PXL
      And our tanks no longer fire missiles?

      Shoot something shoot. But do they get... what
      Remember the results of the firing during "Army-2020":
      T-90A: three TURs - two misses, one hit.
      T-80U: three TURs - two misses, one hit.
      T-80UE-1: three TURs - one miss, two hits.
      T-80BVM: three TURs - three misses, zero hits.
      T-72B3: four TURs - zero misses, four hits.

      And this is at demonstration shooting at an international exhibition.
  26. OLEG CZIGANOV
    OLEG CZIGANOV 25 January 2023 11: 18
    +6
    When the Americans and Germans deliver their tanks to Ukraine, by the summer of 2024, then they will attack, and now they have enough to defend themselves and this number is enough, and the artillery systems work effectively. While we are picking, they will be preparing. As for tanks, which greatly helps us with an overwhelming advantage in tanks and aircraft, I don’t talk about ships at all. If we take such settlements as Soledar and such losses for a month, then apparently we will approach Kyiv in 30-40 years, and in a week they will recapture an area the size of Liman from us. Our command did not take into account a lot of things when preparing for the special operation, but most importantly, in 30 years we never learned how to fight, and who was to teach, our teachers were busy tearing things apart.
    1. Proud
      Proud 27 January 2023 03: 41
      +2
      The only army that knows how to storm cities today is the Russian one (which Wagner belongs to). And to take Mariupol, Severodonetsk, Lisichansk or Soledar by storm is a big task that has been solved. Ukrainian troops did not take anything by storm. What they took, they gave back. The Americans, by the way, also did not have any assaults on cities after World War II, which would be protected by a regular army. (Yes, and in the Second World War, they can only be credited with the capture of Aachen.) In Fallujah, there was a hotbed of partisan resistance when all of Iraq had long been captured by the Americans. They threw phosphorus and everything. With Rakka, it was about the same thing - they bombed out, then they sent the Kurds to clean up the ruins.
  27. Old tanker
    Old tanker 25 January 2023 11: 21
    +2
    As usual with Skomorokhov, the essence of the article does not match the title. Essentially, the answer has not been given. The article carries a lot of information on the use of Challengers in Iraq and nothing more.
    And probably the author is not aware that the Challenger-3 will not be built from scratch, but the existing Challenger-3 will be converted into it.
    The conclusion of a contract between Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land and the British Ministry of Defense for the modernization of 148 Challenger 2 main battle tanks to the Challenger 3 level became known on Friday, May 7. The cost of the agreement is £ 800 million. The program will begin in 2021; the tank should enter service in 2027. Its full combat readiness is scheduled for 2030.
    1. Aviator_
      Aviator_ 25 January 2023 20: 27
      +2
      As usual with Skomorokhov, the essence of the article does not match the title.
      And not only that gives his style. Usually the author, if he has something to say about the essence of the discussion, will definitely appear and answer certain questions (with different results, of course). But Roman never does this - he has nothing to say, provoked the people to discuss and is satisfied.
  28. usm5
    usm5 25 January 2023 12: 24
    -3
    And did the author forget about the guided missile that our tank shoots through the gun barrel? The range of destruction of this missile is 5 km and there are at least 4 of them in the BC of the tank.
    1. cold wind
      cold wind 25 January 2023 13: 32
      +6
      Indeed, it is better not to remember about ATGMs. Absolutely meaningless weapons for a tank if we are talking about the 1-2 generation (it flies for a long time, it doesn’t take tanks head-on, you need to stand still, it’s extremely difficult to get 1-2 km), the 3rd generation at least has the possibility of firing from closed positions. We have nothing natural close to the 3rd generation from ATGM (S).
      From the Army 2020 forum:
      Of the 16 launches, 8 misses - exactly half. And this, we note, in polygon conditions and for fixed targets!

      https://topwar.ru/174472-polovina-raket-ne-popala-v-cel-v-seti-razocharovany-strelbami-na-armii-2020.html

      1. Foul skeptic
        Foul skeptic 25 January 2023 13: 51
        +7
        Indeed, it is better not to remember about ATGMs.

        A little ahead of me with biathlon memories from two years ago. And these are the results at a distance of 2 km (!!!) (although according to the UKS 2,5-4). And the point is not even in preparation, but in the capabilities of optics to consider the enemy at ranges above 2,5 km. Despite the fact that while your ATGM hobbles over these 2,5 km, they will have time to put a crowbar in you twice, since you cannot leave the line of fire, and after the arrival of the first one, the probability that the gunner will break the guidance is close to one.
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 25 January 2023 17: 00
        +3
        Quote from cold wind
        From the Army 2020 forum:
        Of the 16 launches, 8 misses - exactly half. And this, we note, in polygon conditions and for fixed targets!

        In fairness, the repeatedly cursed Serdyukov T-72B3 then managed to hit all four TURs. Apparently, for a mass vehicle, several experienced crews for all armored vehicles were still able to find.
        1. Negro
          Negro 25 January 2023 17: 33
          0
          Quote: Alexey RA
          Apparently, for a mass vehicle, several experienced crews for all armored vehicles were still able to find.

          Against this background, it is amusing to read about the cross-armed former brothers who will only get to the nearest ditch on imported products.
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 26 January 2023 10: 02
            +1
            Quote: Negro
            Against this background, it is amusing to read about the cross-armed former brothers who will only get to the nearest ditch on imported products.

            Uh-huh ... and against the background of our 1st Guards. TA too.
  29. Georgy Sviridov_2
    Georgy Sviridov_2 25 January 2023 13: 35
    -5
    And why nominal number 2,2 and 2,3?
    But no one bothers to use the T-90 at long distances. In general, of course, there are duels, but against the background of the fact that Ukraine has lost up to 3000 tanks (of course, some part of it has to be repaired and returned to service), tank duels are not even percentages, but mileage.
  30. Illanatol
    Illanatol 25 January 2023 13: 55
    -1
    Quote: Grandfather is an amateur
    You still have to get closer. Yes, our tanks are fast, but the situation is about the same as the T-34 against the Tiger. The Germans, judging by the memoirs of veterans, were not eager to attack the Pz-Vl. We stood in our positions and fired at our vehicles. And in order to be guaranteed to hit the "Tiger", the T-34 (not to be confused with the T-34-85!) Had to approach a distance of 300-500 meters, moreover, to the sides or stern of a German tank.


    It all depends on the conditions, on the topography. In the Kuban steppe - the problem is to approach at close range, the place is open. And if greenery, ravines, ravines, all sorts of mounds?
    And what is the relief in Ukraine in the database zone? Flat as a table steppe or desert as in Iraq?
    And what, the fact that you can shoot rackets from a smoothbore gun is not a fact at all, empty stories?

    There have been and will be tank battles in Ukraine, but hardly in large numbers. We will definitely not see new "prokhorovoks".
  31. Illanatol
    Illanatol 25 January 2023 14: 05
    -2
    Quote from cold wind
    Indeed, it is better not to remember about ATGMs. Absolutely meaningless weapons for a tank if we are talking about the 1-2 generation (it flies for a long time, it doesn’t take tanks head-on, you need to stand still, it’s extremely difficult to get 1-2 km), the 3rd generation at least has the possibility of firing from closed positions. We have nothing natural close to the 3rd generation from ATGM (S).


    Oh really?

    But what about "Reflex" and "Invar-M"? Completely useless? In Syria, they showed not bad, and the Indians bought 10 thousand of these missiles. And another license for the production of 15 at home.
    So it's not a completely useless weapon.
  32. Sergey39
    Sergey39 25 January 2023 14: 16
    -1
    I remember at some NATO exercises, especially for this tank, they came up with an exercise plan, taking into account the selection of terrain and the passage of this terrain by the tank. This does not happen in war. The weight of the tank will not allow it to be used, the pot is full for its intended purpose. Almost the entire analysis is based on the clash of tanks and means of confrontation from different eras. To date, such an analysis is not relevant, if not to pour balm on the soul of the Anglo-Saxons.
    Ah, so the current war will show everything!
  33. Appraiser
    Appraiser 25 January 2023 14: 56
    +3
    It is only necessary to learn one rule, the rule, in the hands of a professional, and a "wooden" tank will be dangerous for the enemy. Crew training and timely technical support and maintenance are an integral part of success ..... soldier
  34. The comment was deleted.
  35. Sergio63
    Sergio63 25 January 2023 15: 54
    -3
    Welcome to Russia! We don’t have such an instance in Kubinka yet !!? But in principle, they should not reach the front line at all ... they will be destroyed immediately after crossing the border! Or am I wrong???
    1. agond
      agond 25 January 2023 18: 01
      +2
      Quote: Zufei
      The specific ground pressure of the T-90 and Challenger 2 is comparable and is approximately 0.97 kgf / cm², depending on the modification.

      0.97kg / cm2 is the static pressure of a stationary tank, when moving, the picture becomes more complicated, dynamic pressure occurs. If the length of the tracks is longer, then the time of its contact with the ground will be longer and the vibrations created during the movement of the tank last longer and the peak loads on the ground of a heavier vehicle will be higher (despite the same static specific load) as a result, the track after the Challenger will be deeper than after the T-90,
  36. Biggi_2006
    Biggi_2006 25 January 2023 18: 21
    -1
    We had 122 mm rifles on the IS-3, T-10M and they fought a lot, especially in the Sinai. The domestic designers were not impressed with the 122 rifled gun, they switched to the 115-125 smoothbore.
    And yes, the initial speed is 125 mm BPS-1800 m / s, and not 900 with a tail, respectively, and the energy is 4 times higher.
  37. edatlt
    edatlt 25 January 2023 18: 28
    +7
    There is no need to compare the performance characteristics and engage in capping
    Understand one thing, that all the equipment supplied is modern, and it will at least destroy 1 soldier, tank crew, etc.
    And the more supplies there are, the more victims on our part.
  38. Pavel57
    Pavel57 25 January 2023 20: 18
    0
    We can recall the confrontation between Iraqi T-72s and Iranian Chieftains. The score is roughly equal.
  39. Mint Gingerbread
    Mint Gingerbread 25 January 2023 20: 19
    0
    And what is there to compare. Optoelectronic equipment is better than that of outdated modifications of the 60-80 series, unless, of course, the modifications of foreign tanks are "fresh". Armor protection is also better. The stumbling block is maintenance, refueling, trained crew.
    Oh, where is the theoretical t-100, which can be raised to 60 tons. Armata is certainly good, but too expensive for large-scale hostilities.
  40. engy
    engy 25 January 2023 21: 00
    0
    And what is this topic in the tanks of the Soviet school as rocket and cannon weapons. They write about her, but in reality, over the past decades, I have not heard anything about her. There, the range, in theory, should be higher. There were even T-55 upgrades, if I'm not mistaken. True, such a system reduces the number of barrel shots, again, as they wrote about it. I even found about the T-90S, but there is little data on this topic https://topwar.ru/68-raketno-pushechnyj-tank-t-90s.html
  41. TOR2
    TOR2 25 January 2023 22: 05
    0
    In general, the Challenger proved to be a very strong machine, not afraid of the RPG-7, which was so adored in all the armies of the Middle East.
    And here is one interesting question - where did the shots for the RPG-7 come from? In the Middle East at that time, there were either Chinese replicas or very outdated Soviet-style shots in large numbers.
  42. acetophenone
    acetophenone 25 January 2023 22: 20
    -2
    Quote: Mikhail Krivopalov
    Until war is declared, any country can sell / give anything to another!

    Did you seriously write this? Or in polemical passion? Remind me who North Korea has declared war on? And Iran?
  43. Zufei
    Zufei 25 January 2023 22: 33
    0
    Quote: Biggi_2006

    And yes, the initial speed is 125 mm BPS-1800 m / s, and not 900 with a tail, respectively, and the energy is 4 times higher.

    There in the equation kin. energy has a second factor - mass. Is she the same with bops? lol
  44. Alexander Kuksin
    Alexander Kuksin 26 January 2023 00: 38
    0
    I'm not a tanker, but as far as I know, tanks don't fight tanks.
  45. the same doctor
    the same doctor 26 January 2023 01: 54
    0
    Tanks don't fight tanks. Tanks must hit enemy positions, and enemy tanks must be destroyed by other means.
    .
    And now about other means. Our designers played with weight savings and manufacturability. As a result, it is expensive and small. And you need a lot, simpler, cheaper and many times more powerful. And let the weight be 10 times more: it's not scary, you can load it onto a UAZ trailer. True, you still need to have a minimum of electronics ...
    .
    I can't write more. However, my hints of March 22 are now described in the comments quite specifically. So they will soon think of these hints.
  46. lukash66
    lukash66 26 January 2023 09: 24
    0
    Even during the Second World War, oncoming tank battles were rather rare. And even they fought not purely tanks against tanks. For example, near Prokhorovka, for direct fire from the Nemchura, not only all attached anti-tank guns, but also divisional and corps artillery were delivered. divisions. Including 8,8 cm air defense guns, put on direct fire. Tank versus tank in the field is WOT. And the Red Army in the fight against tanks in the first place assigned not to tanks, but to anti-tank artillery, minefields, attack aircraft.
  47. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 26 January 2023 09: 57
    +3
    T-90 vs Challenger 2: who has a better chance?

    How many times have they told the world that it is not tanks or pieces of iron that are fighting, but formations. The one who can create a more perfect OShS and fill it with trained personnel and equipment will win.
    And the pieces of iron ... in 1941, the panzer division on 35 Czechs and two dozen "fours-kurts" rolled out the Soviet TD with fifty KVs with a small and large tower. Although it would seem - where is 35 (t) and where is KV?
    1. Negro
      Negro 26 January 2023 12: 16
      0
      Quote: Alexey RA
      The one who can create a more perfect OShS and fill it with trained personnel and equipment will win.

      Uh-uh.

      SVO has its own characteristics in this regard.
    2. Proud
      Proud 27 January 2023 20: 54
      0
      And how did the KV-1 tank (starley commander Z. Kolobanov) destroy 20 German tanks on August 1941, 22, do you want to remember? And his entire company knocked out 43 tanks in one battle.
  48. Alex242
    Alex242 26 January 2023 13: 58
    +1
    soon they will meet on the battlefield, the theory can be written and read as much as you like, but on the field
    this is another and most accurate test....
  49. air wolf
    air wolf 26 January 2023 21: 31
    0
    http://artofwar.ru/p/ponamarchuk_e/text_0300.shtml
  50. Observer2014
    Observer2014 26 January 2023 23: 53
    0
    Mlyn. An interesting topic. I love articles like this. But if you go into history. But after all, we have heard many times that we can make "crowbars" from depleted uranium. And this technology is known to us and left for difficult times?! Maybe hard times have come?