The modernized T-72B3 surpasses the "flying" T-80BV

Industry continues to supply the Russian army tanks T-72B3. Currently, in addition to Nizhny Tagil on the modernization of the "seventy-two" are also working in Omsk. The modernized T-72B3 replaces in the troops not only the old versions of the Ural tanks, but also the gas turbine T-80BV.

T-72B3

According to the newspaper of the Western Military District "Guarding the Motherland", the tank battalion of one of the motorized rifle brigades of the district was fired for the first time with a regular shell of modernized T-72 tanks that appeared in service at the end of 2012. Earlier in service with this compound were T-80.

Such a replacement caused a mixed reaction. Many consider it unequal.
The T-80BV was adopted as early as 1985. In fact, it differed from the base model 1978 of the year only by setting the first-generation dynamic protection "Contact." At the end of the 70s, the T-80Bs were considered the best in the world, but in the middle of the 80s, they already began to give way to their western peers in terms of some characteristics, in particular, if possible, to fight at night.

T-80B

As a result, at the Kirov plant in Leningrad in 1985, the new T-80U tank was launched in a series, which in its characteristics in 1,25 was superior to the previous model. But, unfortunately, this tank, still considered one of the best in the world, was released in a very limited series. In addition, most of the machines of this type did not receive the Agave-2 thermal imager developed for them.

As for the T-80BV, then at present this machine is considered obsolete by all characteristics. The armor protection of this tank does not correspond to the existing threats, the guided weapons complex is not working, and the means of communication are also outdated. The only advantage is the engine in the 1100 HP. But he is very voracious. The fuel supply of 1090 liters plus 680 liters in external tanks, and the power reserve is very small, only about 370 km. In addition, the turbine itself is almost 10 times more expensive than the B-84 engine used on the T-72B3.

As for the T-72B3, there was an opportunity to tighten the characteristics of the machine to the modern level. The most radical, that appeared on the tank, is the installation of one of the best in the world multichannel sight "Pine-U", with a thermal imager. As a result, the gunner operator is now capable of hitting targets, including guided missiles, at any time of the day, without paying attention to dust, fumes and other adverse conditions. The sight has an automatic target tracking, which greatly facilitates the work of the shooter.

T-80BV

The commander of the vehicle was given the opportunity to duplicate the work of the gunner-operator; on the screen he has, he receives a “picture” from the main sight. The gun, communications equipment, and others were also replaced with new ones.

T-72B3 was first criticized for a somewhat flawed installation of dynamic protection, but this flaw is now being eliminated.

As for the T-80BV, the designers from St. Petersburg have developed a lot of modifications of this tank, but at present the course has been set for unifying the tank fleet, and therefore the gas turbine vehicles will be removed from the army as the resource progresses.

T-80U

Although the gas turbine direction should not be completely abandoned. It is necessary to continue the research work in this topic.

Comments

[Die-hard]

A very dull upgrade. In fact, from the T-72B mod. 89 differs only in the sight and the absence of the "moon". The ERA units on the turret are installed in the best traditions of UVZ - crooked, obliquely and poorly. Particularly impressive is the place where the "moon" spotlight used to hang. Although it is obvious that in this case the design and technology of the tower is to blame - the cast dome-shaped crap somehow does not contribute to the normal placement of the DZ blocks, and the welded tower, unfortunately, is not included in the upgrade kit.

[leon-iv]

Gutaryat photo old Already added
But about Sosna_u, it’s in vain one of the best tank sights in the world
There, besides Mon, many more things were put by Google

[Die-hard]

Quote: leon-iv

many more things put google

The fact of the matter is that this is a lot of things that are just stuffing. Everything else is original. The power plant was not changed, the auxiliary power plant does not smell, the remote control of the anti-aircraft machine-gun installation was not delivered - they were limited to the shield. Very dejectedly, yes, but to replace the dead, the 80s will do.

[DDW]

About the killed 80s .... to put it mildly, do not get excited. They are not dead. And the reliability of the power plant and transmission with the chassis is a cut above the T-72. I happened to serve on all types of tanks, from T-54 to T-90. Most of the positive is from the T-80.
Now many "experts" say that we need a new tank that meets modern requirements. Here at least one of these talkers said WHAT tank is it ?? And how to fit it into modern conditions, when a penny grenade launcher is capable of burning a multimillion-dollar car !!
The point is not in tanks, but in their application and the conditions of the environment into which these tanks fall by chance.
And in China in 2009, the T-80 made a splash. Reliability, maneuverability, accuracy and virtually no ... damage. And this is on machines with 20-25 years of age. The guys who were in the armor just competently did their job.

[cth; fyn]

but to replace the dead 80s will do.

About the killed 80s .... to put it mildly, do not get excited.

I think Maine had in mind machines that have exhausted their life.

[Die-hard]

Exactly. Not every tank will survive as many generations of conscripts as these 80s survived.

[Colorists]

Quote: DDW

And in China in 2009, the T-80 made a splash

But what then do the Chinese build their tanks on the basis of the t-72?

[beech]

indeed, the location and configuration of the dz are, to put it mildly, surprising ... is it really impossible to stick a dozen more korroboks because the dofig of an unprotected place

[Roll]

Dynamic protection is placed correctly, here we copied the Chinese. The fact is that grenade launchers rarely attack a tank in the forehead, the bulk of grenade launcher shots occur at an angle, and here the protection is optimal.

[Die-hard]

Contact-5 on the production T-72B has been made since the 89th year and it was set exactly the same crookedly. Who copied whom is a moot point. At the expense of grenade launchers - you are again wrong. On the same site there is an article with an interesting photo and its description:

T-72B (M) 74th Guards Omsbr, struck by a shot from an RPG in an unprotected gap between the KDZ overhead of a tower and a fenced-in fuel tank (apparently, they tried to hit a tank with a second grenade in a tower’s already unprotected fuel tank). The crew of the tank died. January 1995

[evil hamster]

The problem is that it would be nice for the driver to get out of the tank not only when the tower is deployed strictly forward.

[танк]

Yes, even though you as DZ hang against RPG-29 there is no reception.

[Alexander D.]

Dear, and there is a trick against "Vampire":
1) KAZ BLOCK



2) DZ DUPLET - while asked not to post on the Internet

[ramzes1776]

Quote: Alexander D.

KAZ BARREL

Here you need to spend the bulk of the money on such R&D. With such things you can fight on old T-55,62,72 in any terrain, including in the city!

[evil hamster]

Yes, gorgeous, in your first video it is clearly visible that the PG-7VR hits the ground in front of the target, awesome tests.

[Alexander D.]

It obviously didn’t hit the top plate, as it was originally planned, but if it fell into the ground, KAZ would not detonate - KAZ reacts to grenades within a radius of 2 m. On the video of a high-speed camera, the undermining of the PG-7VR is visible.

[evil hamster]

Mil man from 2.38 to 2.44 clearly shows that the grenade falls into the ground in front of the target. even the fountain of the earth rises. The testers did not deign to hit the target from 50 meters from the machine. What kind of results can we talk about when such a fierce mowing in the presentation video ???

[cth; fyn]

The RPG-29 has a double warhead, and the Relikt KDZ is designed for such grenades, plus increased projectile resistance and minus the price ... well, longing sadness.

[Russian]

Yeah, the T-72B “Slingshot” is certainly much more solid:

[Alexander D.]

The slingshot is the most tracked modernization of the T-72 (the T-90 was not even close). The only negative thing about the slingshot is the engine. It is high time for Russia to find an alternative to the engine with a 75-year history. But again, the greed of Russian officials knows no bounds - their children will not serve in the army, they will "serve" in Oxford and Ibiza.

[Die-hard]

Came here to PR your two-stroke? 6TD WILL NOT PASS. Rather, the Klimov’s turbines are reincarnating, than the whole country will again deal with the division of the Kharkov genius.

[Kars]

Quote: Inflexible

6TD WILL NOT PASS.

Where will not pass?
China buys them in hundreds.
And Bangladesh, despite Russian loans, buys Chinese tanks with Ukrainian diesel engines.

Quote: Inflexible

Klimovsky turbines are more likely to reincarnate

In this case, the armature can lead, while the same diesel engine is installed on the chassis

[Die-hard]

Quote: Kars

China buys them in hundreds.

For export cars. For themselves, they put their diesel - albeit a German clone.

[Kars]

Quote: Inflexible

For export cars. For themselves, they put their diesel - albeit a German clone.

Well, they need 1500 hp, but they will soon put it on their own how they will conduct a full cycle of Ukrainian tests of 1500 hp.

[Die-hard]

Quote: Kars

but soon they will put on their own

When they will bet, then speak. So far, they have their own diesel engine on their last tanks, which, by the way, is one-and-a-half and four-stroke and there is no sense in changing it to 6td.

[Kars]

Quote: Inflexible

one and a half stroke and four stroke

Is this some kind of mantra? Does it matter to you how many clock cycles when it gives out rated power? And dimensions, dimensions))))) and naturally the price.

[Die-hard]

I don’t, but the BTRZ personnel and the Rembats are sorry.

[Kars]

Quote: Inflexible

I don’t, but the BTRZ personnel and the Rembats are sorry

probably about the same thought Pakistan putting engines on al-Khalid.
mice cried. sobbed but continued to eat a cactus)))))))

[Die-hard]

They were put on al-Khalid in order to unify the park with the T-80UD, which Pakistan has enough.

[Kars]

Well, to the same, why didn’t they change the bad diesel engines to the T-80UD in order to unify them with the best on al-Khalid? For example, a Russian clone from China?
At the same time, Pakistan has more than 3000 tanks, of which only 300 T-80UD.

Quote: Inflexible

yshi cried. sobbed but continued to eat a cactus)))))))

Russia says China VT1A victory Russia T90S tanks orders Morocco 150
http://www.9abc.net/index.php/archives/3608

[bask]

Quote: Kars

mice cried. sobbed but continued to eat a cactus)))))))

,, Wild mice, Pakistani, they just have nothing to eat ....
But the South Korean, high-tech ones, installed MTU with a V-shaped arrangement of cylinders and a liquid cooling system with a capacity of 1 l / s on their MBT K1A871 German OBT K501AKa-1200 eight-cylinder diesel engine.

[Kars]

Quote: bask

MV871Ka-501 MTU company with a V-shaped arrangement of cylinders and a liquid cooling system with a capacity of 1200 l / s

We open Wikipedia elementarily and read

K1 (Type 88) - the main battle tank of South Korea, a variant of the American M1 Abrams tank, adapted to Korean operating conditions. Designed in the late 1970s - early 1980s. It was mass-produced from 1985 to 2010

what conclusion can you make from this quote?

[bask]

Quote: Kars

oh you can conclude from this quote

I know what conclusion .U. Koreans made. In 2007, they created a new MBT K-2,, Black Panther, as an engine German diesel MTU-883 with a capacity of 1500 horsepower. Having such a developed automotive industry, Koreans are putting German diesel on their MBT (((newest)). Why would it be?

[Kars]

Quote: bask

I know what conclusion .Yu. Koreans made. Created in 2007 a new MBT K-2 ,,

No, come on, first you conclude

Quote: bask

on their MBT K1A1 German

Agreed? Otherwise you become so like a frivolous commentator, and .. a racer ..

Quote: bask

1500 horsepower. Koreans having such a developed automotive industry, put on their MBT (((newest))) German diesel

Well, they didn’t get it from them, they suffered for about five years — it happens, they set it up and worked earlier, you see, not everyone can make tank diesel engines, but at the same time they didn’t put a French hyperbar, and how could they so lohanutsa and did not cooperate with manufacturers of TD from Russia , although yes there is no spent 1.5 nicknames, but anyway.

[bask]

Quote: Kars

Agreed? Otherwise you become so like a frivolous commentator, and .. a racer.

What exactly, I drove. Off topic?

Quote: Kars

No, come on, first you conclude

But there is only one conclusion. The Koreans abandoned the Amerov gas turbine, in favor of a German, economical diesel engine, albeit with less power.

[Kars]

Quote: bask

specifically, I drove off. Not on the topic?

Quote: bask

Wild, Pakistani mice, they just have nothing to eat ....
And here the South Korean, high-tech, put on their MBT K1A1 German, multi-fuel four-stroke eight-cylinder diesel engine MV871Ka-501 f

Do you want to say that you didn’t even want to approach the topic of a push-pull TD? or wanted to?

Quote: bask

the Oreans abandoned the Amerovskoye gas turbine, in favor of a German, economical diesel engine, albeit with less power.

Well, for starters, their tank is lighter, and the price without gas turbine engines is too high. And what about the power on K2, is it already the same?

[bask]

Quote: Kars

Do you want to say that you didn’t even want to approach the topic of a push-pull TD? or wanted to?

I won’t talk about global trends, you don’t like this word. I’ll say easier, two-stroke diesel engines for MBT are not produced by more than one country in the world except Ukraine. If they were so effective + price quality. World corporations, BAE Systems, Deneral Dynamics , would have already put their production on stream.
You didn’t think about why tank diesel engines for MBTs are released only by countries producing aircraft engines. Although dozens of countries produce cars. Even the Koreans, with their technologies, cannot make a modern engine for their MBTs.
Ukraine also did not come up with anything new. The engines of the 5TDF and 6TD families operate a legacy of technologies invented in the USSR.

[Kars]

Quote: bask

I will not speak

But the network started, I’ll mention it in Pakistan. And you don’t want to draw a conclusion from the date of development and the start of production of the Korean tank, and why there can still be a Soviet, and then a Ukrainian engine. And at the same time you think that something has proved.

Quote: bask

Krajina, too, wasn’t inventing anything new. The engines of the 5TDF and 6TD families operate a legacy of technologies invented in the USSR.

Like Russia, I came up with something special in tank diesels from the time of the USSR. Even that is star-shaped, well, you understand, they’re still doing it from the USSR.

Quote: bask

two-stroke diesel engines for MBT are not produced by more than one country in the world, except Ukraine

And what should we not do because of this? They work. They buy - what the others do there are their problems. The main thing is that if necessary, we will put the engine that the customer wants.

Quote: bask

only countries producing aircraft engines

In my opinion, aircraft engines make more countries than tanks. But it’s kind of violet to me. If Ukraine does aircraft engines

[bask]

Quote: Kars

Ukraine aircraft engines makes

I posted about it. With regard to the complexity of technology, engines for MBTs are comparable with aviation, therefore, countries producing units.

[Die-hard]

Moreover, in the west, tank engines are usually riveted from something. The German diesel engine was made from a diesel locomotive, the American turbine was aviation, the Finnish engine on French leclercans was also originally made for completely different purposes ..

[bask]

Quote: Inflexible

Moreover, in the west tank engines

But the two-stroke diesel was originally installed on German boats in the Second World War.

[Die-hard]

On airplanes. Jumo 205. From him, by the way, the Kharkov two-stroke is leading its roots.

[Kars]

Quote: bask

I posted about it

Strange as that

Quote: bask

Wild, Pakistani mice, they just have nothing to eat ....
But the South Korean, high-tech, put on their MBT K1A1 German, multi-fuel

[warm]

Quote: Kars

And dimensions, dimensions

and what is wrong with the dimensions of the candy bar? it really is changed in 1 hour, unlike T-shek, where 24 hours are provided for this ...

[Alexander D.]

In order to reincarnate climatic turbines, it is necessary to tear off UVZ to zero and restore the design bureau in St. Petersburg. Otherwise, Sienko will lay bones, but the T-80 will not miss.

[Die-hard]

Quote: Alexander D.

restore KB

Nobody closed the special machine. Remained out of tank affairs - yes, but there was no talk of closing and is not going on.

[Alexander D.]

And if the design bureau remains "out of business for the tank" and does not even propose modernization projects for the T-80, do you think this is normal? It was one of the two leading design bureaus in the Soviet Union, which followed its own path without putting a spoke in the wheels. There was a normal constructive competition with the KMDB, in contrast to the UVZ, which actively watered and throw mud at everyone, taking the merits of others.

[Die-hard]

Quote: Alexander D.

There was normal constructive competition with the HCMB

And joint projects. Remind me how out of 219A the 478th was born?
But the essence does not change. UVZ could have been in the undercover fight, and therefore survived in this field, and the tandem of the special machine-kbtm with the undercover fight was not so smooth, so they were out of work. Although no, KBTM is now under ultrasound, but these are trifles.

[Alexander D.]

And joint projects. Remind me how out of 219A the 478th was born?

After adopting the T-80 tank, work began to improve its design. The work was carried out in two directions. In the design bureau of the Malyshev Plant, the Object 478 tank was being developed; in parallel, work on the modernized T-80 tank under the designation Object 219A was started in the design bureau of the Kirov Plant. The Kharkov version of the modernization of the T-80 involved equipping the chassis of the “Object 219A” with a 6TD-1 diesel engine with a capacity of 1000 hp, as well as installing a new promising tower developed for the T-64A modernization project under the designation “Object 476”. In 1976, the design of the machine was completed, but further work on it was not continued, since the main emphasis at that time was on gas turbine power plants. After the death of D.F. Ustinov, the support of the design bureau of the Leningrad Kirov Plant began to weaken and the Ministry of Defense was seriously thinking about transferring T-80 tanks to diesel engines, since the chassis of T-64A tanks completely exhausted their modernization capabilities and its further development was impractical .

As a result, was born

Object 478B - T-80UD main battle tank

[evil hamster]

Oh I see you are faithful to the Tarasenko precepts, nude nude

[Alexander D.]

Oh I see you are faithful to the Tarasenko precepts, nude nude

These covenants are quoted from Wikipedia. What does Tarasenko have to do with it?

[evil hamster]

Slingshot - the most track-based modernization of the T-72 (the T-90 was not nearby)

From these galleries of pedagogy? Amazing

[evil hamster]

Well, yeah, the Junkers motor is the pinnacle of engine building, why are you so predictable?

[Alexander D.]

Well, yeah, the Junkers motor is the pinnacle of engine building, why are you so predictable?

And for you, the top of the V-2 engine from the T-34? So he is 75 years old - they could come up with a newer thing.
Junkers' Suitcase — the Jumo 205 series of two-stroke turbo-turbine aircraft engines with oppositely moving pistons — was created in the early 30s of the twentieth century. The Jumo 205-C engine features the following: 6-cylinder, 600 hp piston stroke 2 x 160 mm, volume 16.62 l., compression ratio 17: 1, at 2.200 rpm.
On the basis of these developments, A.D. Charomsky in 1947 created a two-stroke M-305 diesel engine with take-off power of 7360 kW (10 hp) and a single-cylinder engine compartment U-000 in the USSR in 305.
In 1954 A.D. Charomsky comes up with a proposal to create a diesel engine for a medium tank based on the U-305. This proposal coincided with the requirement of the chief designer of the new tank A.A. Morozov, and A.D. Charomsky was appointed chief designer of the plant. V. Malysheva in Kharkov.
Since the tank motor design bureau of this plant remained mainly in Chelyabinsk, A.D. Charomsky had to form a new design bureau, create an experimental base, set up pilot and serial production, and practice technology that the plant did not have.
So there is the Soviet 4TPD. It was a working engine, but with one drawback - the power was just over 400 hp, which was not enough for the tank. Charomsky puts another cylinder and gets 5TD (entry 11.02.57).

[evil hamster]

Quote: Alexander D.

And for you, the top of the V-2 engine from the T-34?

Imagine no.

Quote: Alexander D.

So he is 75 years old - they could come up with a newer thing.

Yeah, they came up with a sample of the 2B series, they probably heard about this, or for example the Chelyabinsk T series. And what’s interesting, if the country hadn’t invested loot in the Kharkov two-stroke engine for 20 years, so that it worked, and then didn’t swallow a bunch of dough in gas turbines, and a small fraction of those financial and scientific resources would be invested by 4-stroke diesel engines, you’ll now look at all over the world on an equal footing with MTU they traded.

[svp67]

Quote: evil hamster

Well, yeah, the Junkers motor is the pinnacle of engine building, why are you so predictable?

If you saw them "live", you would immediately understand which of the engines is executed with a greater technical culture ...

[evil hamster]

Oga, and the Leningrad turbine has a higher technical level, and what of this fact have you drawn conclusions for yourself?

[Ak 12]

Enough to upgrade the tanks, it’s time to create something new, but in the near future there will be tanks 72b10

[skeptic-]

Quote: Ak 12

Enough to upgrade the tanks it's time to create something new

Tell Americans and other Western countries about this, otherwise they are fools who are still modernizing their equipment, in addition to making new ones.

[CAMS]

The possibilities of Amer’s modernization are practically absent only computer stuffing

[Die-hard]

Yes, the mass reserve on the same M1A2 Abrams is clearly exceeded, only mincemeat can be modernized. Now they are working on a modernization project in order to somewhat lose weight. Something tells me that the negro-loader will retire with the turbine and its filters by 2/3 MTO.

[Alexander D.]

Do you think that the RF Ministry of Defense will allocate a lot of money to replace the entire armored fleet of the RF with ARMATU. You read an article yesterday that the BMD-4 is $ 2,6 million (!). Imagine how much the mythical ARMATA will cost. So BMD buy 7 units per year. Modernization is inevitable, because today tanks are needed more as a deterrent. Now all local wars are waged in cities - heavy infantry fighting vehicles such as BMPT-64 and Akhzarit are needed there.

[cth; fyn]

there are more needed heavy infantry fighting vehicles such as BMPT-64 and Akhzarit.

I agree that it is time to create counter-terrorist troops on the basis of the Interior Ministry troops, with special weapons suitable for highly specialized combat against partisans and conducting battles in the city, good mine protection and mine sweepers and "jammers". Many of them will not be needed, because we only have the UK guilty of this matter.

[erased]

Well said. It remains to add that in the future the basis of the army’s tank fleet should be the tanks of the Armata project (I don’t know what index it will be assigned to). And there should be 3000 in parts and as many in warehouses. Not less. By the time the fleet is completely replaced, all obsolete cars must either be sold or scrapped.
The Armata tank itself must have a large modernization resource in order to be operational for 30 years.

[bask]

Quote: erased

Mata (I don’t know which index will be assigned to him). And there should be 3000 in parts and as many in warehouses. Not less. By the time

,, Armat ,, in the troops until the age of 20 will not be.
And most importantly, what will be the cost of the tank. Yesterday on the branch. 7 BMD-4M will arrive in the airborne forces, instead of 10, at a price of 80 ml per unit. T-90 cost exceeded 100 ml per unit.
How much will Armata cost, considering its saturation with electronics. 200 ml
no less in today's prices.
Up to 20 years it is necessary to purchase T-90MS.
And all the armored hulls, T-62, T-72, T-80, after running out of tank life, for the manufacture of BMP / BTR-T and assault guns, calories 152 mm.

[Aleks tv]

Quote: bask

And all the armored hulls, T-62, T-72, T-80, after running out of tank life, for the manufacture of BMP / BTR-T and assault guns, calories 152 mm.

Ага.

Quote: erased

all obsolete cars must either be sold or returned to scrap

Nautilized already.
The upgraded stock pocket does not pull in BHVT warehouses.
In Armata: 3000 in the troops and 3000 in warehouses - it will not be enough for such an extended country as Russia with potentially different theater of operations.
The mobilization resource at the moment is almost destroyed.

[APOCALIPTIC]

Up to 20 years it is necessary to purchase T-90MS.
Is this chtoli? for some reason generals think differently

http://www.newsru.com/russia/14feb2012/t90.html

[YuDDP]

Quote: bask

And most importantly, what is the cost of the tank.

Yes, what's the difference, what will be the cost?
10, or 100, or 1000? Budget money, how much it will cost, they will give as much. The plant employees and allies will only feel better - there is a chance of good salaries.
A discussion of the defense budget topic is another topic. Somehow it is not cut, but only increased recently.

[Metlik]

Why waste machinery? As history shows, there are not too many weapons.

[cth; fyn]

Why waste machinery? As history shows, there are not too many weapons.

The country is large, there is where to store.

[Mhpv]

Well, what are you right after all is deep tuning or facelift so to speak.
T72, like the Vazov classics, was once unsinkable offspring "it's hard to carry, and it's a pity to throw it away" although, again, in our position, the bird in the hands is better than the crane in the sky.

[Die-hard]

Quote: mhpv

it's deep tuning

Deep tuning is T-72B2, that popular "slingshot", and B3 is exactly something like "tonirovochka on five".

[Mhpv]

Or maybe it's the WoT developers ordered for their game?

[Kars]

The modernized T-72B3 surpasses the "flying" T-80BV

it is necessary what a jerk, in 30 years to surpass BV.

[svp67]

Quote: Kars

it is necessary what a jerk, in 30 years to surpass BV.

Yes, just like you, or you want to say that T64BM or T64Е is better?

[Kars]

Quote: svp67

as well as yours, or you want to say that the T64BM or T64E is better?

better than what? and depending on how much.

[svp67]

Quote: Kars

better than what? and depending on how much.

Yes, our new "pipelace" B3 ... At the expense of the price, everything is clear, since you have upgraded several dozen cars, and it looks like we decided to put this business on stream.

[Kars]

Quote: svp67

Yes, our new "pipelace" B3

E is better, we spend as much as you on B3 Bulat would also be better

[Die-hard]

Quote: Kars

E is better

E would be very interesting if there was a loader in the beggar, and not the ammunition of the sparks and the APU. The vertical loading mechanism of 64ki destroys the whole idea, a kind of spoon of shit in a barrel of honey.

[Kars]

Quote: Inflexible

. 64Ki's vertical loading mechanism kills the whole idea

What idea is he ruining? MZ stands on the T-80U and does not ruin anything.
Although of course in your imagination first comes the AZ from the T-72, according to your posts this is naturally understandable. (And with a stretch, probably, through the Leclerc / Type 90 / Yatagan lip)))

[Kars]

It is not clear why this news will not be posted, maybe tomorrow.

In early May, the Federal State Unitary Enterprise Rosoboronexport will send Peru - on board the An-124-100 Ruslan - the T-90S battle tank, for an exhibition during the International Salon of Defense Technologies (SITDEF 2013). According to the information, after this event - which will be held from May 15 to 19 - 90 armored brigade, acantonada will be transferred to the strong general of the EP department Rafael Hoyos Rubio (Rimak) to be evaluated and subjected to a series of operational tests. T-18C is a tank - manufacturer Uralvagonzavod (Russia) - which has a length of 90 m (6.86 m with a gun forward), a width of 9,36 m and a height of 3.78 m; as their weight in battle is 2,22 tons. This is a V-46.5 9252 hp diesel engine, which gives a maximum speed of 1000 km / h and a range of 60 to 550 km. The main armament of the T-700S - staffed by 90 members: the boss truck, the gunner and the driver mechanic - the 3 mm 125A2M de anima Lisa guns are equipped with 46 shells and can be, thanks to its automatic charger (which has 42 shells at home), up to 22 rounds per minute. Estimating its range of 7 m. The average armament of two machine guns make up it: NSVT 2500 mm. - with 12.7 rounds - and a 300 x 7,62R FCT with 54 rounds. In addition, the T-2S can fire the 000M90M Rocket Reflex (AT-9 sniper) - guided by a laser - which has a range of 119 to 11 m. Ammunition weight is 75 kg. and a rocket of about 5000 kg. (from 24, which correspond to fighting from the head) being able to penetrate more than 17 mm of armor. Currently, the Peruvian army - as part of the modernization program of the armed forces (Ugarte project) - plans to acquire between 4.2 and 900 tanks should replace the old T-120, built between 170-55. In recent months, a technical committee evaluator (FET) - responsible for the overall team from the EP Jose Luis Gomez Sanchez - is technically evaluated in M-1973A78 Abrams (USA) .UU), Leopard 1A1 (proposed by Spain) and 2E4 (Netherlands), T-2e and the stronghold of T-6 (Ukraine) and T-64S. (Alejo Marchessini, correspondent for the Edefa group in Lima).

So maybe we’ll look and compare, I hope the Russian Federation Peru does not collect loans to issue loans.

[Die-hard]

Quote: Kars

Although of course in your imagination first comes the AZ from the T-72

My imagination considers a cabin-type MZ and a carousel AZ to be something bad. My imagination loves the leclerc automatic loader, unitary rounds and long crowbars.

[Kars]

Quote: Inflexible

My fantasy considers cabin-type MH and carousel AZ something bad

But MH is certainly worse than AZ?

Quote: Inflexible

My imagination loves the leclerc automatic loader, unitary rounds and long crowbars.

[Die-hard]

Quote: Kars

But MH is certainly worse than AZ?

The best part of the interview with the Bredor.avi group

[Kars]

Quote: Inflexible

The best part of the interview with the Bredor.av group

do not know

[Die-hard]

Please.

[Kars]

not discussing such x is not interesting how about this

Quote: Kars

In recent months, the Technical Committee evaluator (FET) - responsible for the general team from the EP Jose Luis Gomez Sanchez - technically evaluated in M-1A1 Abrams (USA) .UU), Leopard 2A4 (proposed by Spain) and 2E6 (Netherlands), T-64e and the stronghold of T-84 (Ukraine) and T-90S. (Alejo Marchessini, correspondent for the Edefa group in Lima).

[Die-hard]

Delivered for show. After the story of MBT-2000 and 6td, the Peruvians do not want to have any business with Ukraine.

[Kars]

Quote: Inflexible

After the story of MBT-2000 and 6td, the Peruvians do not want to have any business with Ukraine.

Maybe with China? Ukraine did not agree to resell the Chinese tank with our engine, due to a conflict of interest on Typhon.
And for show, you can bring other tanks, if you don’t want to deal with Ukraine))) Polish, for example, Italian, etc. At Gurkhan there is already a repost with what you voiced, but there are no links to sources))))


http://www.defensa.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8805:la-rusa
-rosoboronexport-envia-un-blindado-t-90s-a-peru-en-un-antonov-para-tras-su-expos
icion-en-sitdef-ser-evaluado-por-el-ejercito-de-tierra & catid = 55: latinoamerica & It
emid = 163

[Die-hard]

Quote: Kars

On gurkhan

Still in jojo torasenski. However, both cranks have the letter m, and Andrew, and Alesha.

[Kars]

Quote: Inflexible

Still in jojo torasenski

I respect him more.

[Die-hard]

He just has nothing to read. Continuous repost-repost horseradish understand where.

[Kars]

Quote: Inflexible

Continuous repost-repost horseradish understand where.

there is news, all kinds of things.
Can you advise where it is interesting now?

[Die-hard]

Obviously not in troubling with a torasenka and not in the bmpd comments.

[Kars]

it means nothing concrete but sorry)))

[Die-hard]

For specifics, you will be on the tank. But they don’t like odepts of torasens there.

[Kars]

forum and even with bias.
I thought something serious. Responsible


by the way, it continues to me, but how the little gurch reacts to the news about Ukraine’s participation in the Peruvian tender))) it’s already letting foam.
In theory, to be sure he is confident in superiority, he was even happy - here, they won)))

[Maximus]

Eternal modernization of the "eternal".
In general, is tank modernization relevant? And the number of tanks that we eat? Or, as usual, we have all the best for export, but what remains for us.

[waisson]

T-72 TO PUT monument as ODNAMU SAMPLES FROM PRODUCTION AS tank T-34 A B FORCES NEED NEW TECHNIQUE Answerer segodneshny STANDARDS VREMENI.OPYAT WE govarit O Madeleine laid back during USSR A WHERE MINDS RUSSIAN NOW THAT THEIR sufficient only to REMODELING

[Navuxonastupil]

It is very correctly said in essence, but in form ... It is a sin to mock the Great and the Mighty!

[Algor73]

Armata is not a panacea and it is not known when it will be and whether it will be at all. Still not specifically decided on the very concept of the tank of the future. All the world's tank builders somehow quieted down, new products are inaudible (like the Turkish one does not count, this is not new). And you need to keep your defenses. Russia is moving to a single tank, they have decided on the T-72 (T-90), and they will support it until the day when something becomes clear. And where does the statement that "Sosna-U" is the best sight in the world? Can anyone give comparative characteristics on it?

[PROXOR]

Quote: Algor73

Armata is not a panacea and it is not known when it will be and whether it will be at all. Still not specifically decided on the very concept of the tank of the future. All the world's tank builders somehow quieted down, new products are inaudible (like the Turkish one does not count, this is not new). And you need to keep your defenses. Russia is moving to a single tank, they have decided on the T-72 (T-90), and they will support it until the day when something becomes clear. And where does the statement that "Sosna-U" is the best sight in the world? Can anyone give comparative characteristics on it?

Armata will be. UVZ intensively carries out re-equipment in production. New machines are being bought.

[Die-hard]

Quote: Algor73

Still not specifically decided on the very concept of the tank of the future.

They decided on it back in the 80s, when a riot of uninhabited towers, armored capsules and modular structures blossomed among the design heads. However, in the 90s, the Soviet Union collapsed, in the West they scratched their turnips and decided "to hell with this arms race", in Russia everything was much simpler: there was simply no money. And now, Europe has long forgotten about tank armadas and all their crafts are primarily intended for export to oil Honduras and only a small percentage for its troops, the United States is sawing the modernization of the m1 abrams (with which, according to rumors, the same situation as the Tu-22 and that -22m, because they don't give money for a new tank, but modernization is welcome), they are sawing reinforcement bars in Russia.

[Alexander D.]

With the concept of a tank with a remote armament decided yet not in the 80s, but in 1973 - the project is called T-74. The author of the idea is a certain A.A. Morozov - probably heard about this.

[Die-hard]

Quote: Alexander D.

A.A. Morozov - probably heard about this.

Yes, a noble scammer. Everything worked for him on paper, but in fact, all its jambs were disassembled at VNII-100.

[Alexander D.]

Yes, a noble scammer. Everything worked for him on paper.

Please argue, because before throwing such statements, you need to know well in what conditions he worked then. Morozov is known to everyone who takes on the armored theme, and he left behind a huge legacy. And what do you leave after yourself?
Read at your leisure for general development: http://btvt.narod.ru/istoria_t64/istoria_t64.htm

[Die-hard]

Quote: Alexander D.

it is good to know in what conditions he then worked

I know very well. And how he came up with the loading mechanism and immediately drove to Moscow for a prize, but I forgot to check how it works. Well, what to do, VNII-100 had to take matters into its own hands, dopilivaya it to a sane state. And after all. Nearly..
http://www.vniitransmash.ru/MENU/WE/wem.html

[Alexander D.]

Everyone has their own truth - one that is beneficial to him.

In January 1957, the first prototype of a tank diesel 5TD was prepared for bench tests. At the end of the bench tests 5TD in the same year was transferred to object (running) tests in an experimental tank "object 430", and by May 1958 passed interdepartmental State tests with a good rating.
Nevertheless, it was decided not to transfer the diesel 5TD to mass production. The reason once again was the change in military requirements for new tanks, once again necessitating a rise in power. Taking into account the very high technical and economic performance of the 5TD engine and the reserves built into it (as demonstrated by the tests), the new powerplant with an output of about 700 hp. decided to create based on it.
The introduction of an additional cylinder seriously changed the dynamics of the engine. There was an imbalance that caused intense torsional vibrations in the system. The leading scientific forces of Leningrad (VNII-100), Moscow (NIID) and Kharkov (KPI) are connected to its solution. 5TDF was brought up to standard EXPERIMENTAL by trial and error.
Retaining the transverse arrangement of the motor with a two-sided power take-off and two planetary onboard transmissions located on both sides of the engine, the designers shifted the vacant sides of the engine, parallel to the gearboxes, compressor and gas turbine, previously installed in 4ТD on top of the engine block. The new layout allowed halving the amount of logistic equipment in comparison with the T-54 tank, and traditional components such as the central gearbox, gearbox, main friction clutch, onboard planetary steering mechanisms, onboard gears and brakes were excluded from it. As noted later in the report of the GBTU, the transmission of a new type saved 750 kg of mass and consisted of 150 machined parts instead of the previous 500.

[La hire]

T-80BV - adopted in 1985
T-72B3 - adopted in 2012
What kind of comparison are we talking about?

[Grishka100watt]

T-80BV - adopted in 1985
T-72B3 - adopted in 2012
What kind of comparison are we talking about?

Excuse me, have you slept all these years ??
In general, we had the 90s, they were ruining the country by all means.

It’s good that we still have it.

[Cynic]

Quote: La Hire

What kind of comparison are we talking about?

И

Quote: Grishka100watt

It’s good that we still have it.

Sorry dear Grishka100watt but do you really think it’s correct to compare tanks with a difference of 27 years?

[Grishka100watt]

Sorry dear Grishka100watt, but do you really think that it is correct to compare tanks with a difference of 27 years?

Here we are talking about the fact that one tank that has already served its own is replaced with another that we can offer the troops.

So yes, compare correctly

[Cynic]

Quote: Grishka100watt

We’ll replace the tank that has already served its purpose with another that we can offer the troops.

Sorry, but the key word here is _ we can offer the troops.
If you even think about this epic with the T-72B3 going to replace the T-80U, then sur complete!
Replaced is the replacement of the last Soviet tank with a modernized penultimate one, if you call everything by their proper names!
If the T-90 panegyrics can still be understood (well, such as the first Russian tank), then the praised T-72B3, besides bewilderment and crooked smirks, cannot cause anything!
Regrettably

[Grishka100watt]

Sorry, but the key word here is _ we can offer the troops.
If you even think about this epic with the T-72B3 going to replace the T-80U, then sur complete!
Replaced is the replacement of the last Soviet tank with a modernized penultimate one, if you call everything by their proper names!
If the T-90 panegyrics can still be understood (well, such as the first Russian tank), then the praised T-72B3, besides bewilderment and crooked smirks, cannot cause anything!
Regrettably

I understand, but what to do it's better than nothing!

[seller trucks]

Quote: skeptic

Tell Americans and other Western countries about it, otherwise they are fools who are still modernizing their equipment, in addition to making new

I apologize for the offtopic, but for example, CAT Americans are buying up their old civilian equipment, making capital and onward, like new.

[dmitry46]

I think everyone understands that the T-90 is essentially a deep modernization of the T-72. So why not upgrade all T-72s to T-90s? And then they are engaged in some kind of "masturbation" ...
He served as a tank driver, drove a T-72B, T-80UD, T-90A. So personally, I liked the T-80 the most, it is softer, and the view from it is better.

[Die-hard]

Quote: dmitry46

And then they are engaged in some kind of "masturbation" ...

This masturbation came from Popovkin, who, fortunately, was pushed aside. I hope the GABTU will come to their senses and start buying "slingshots", and not this squalor suitable for the late 80s - mid 90s.

[cth; fyn]

There is no point, because the price of the upgraded T-72 to the T-90A level will be equal to the cost of the T-90A. It’s better to rivet T-90A, and send T-72 to storage warehouses. Moreover, the T-90 at the design level was modernized, and not on the alteration of iron, i.e. tuning.

[dmitry46]

the cost will not be exactly T-90. The hull, chassis and tower are the same.

[Die-hard]

You are a little wrong. At T-90A the tower is welded, at T-72B and T-90 it is cast, rounded.

[evil hamster]

Even the original T90 with a cast tower, the tower is noticeably different from the T72B. The dimensions of the frontal armor are larger, the shape is slightly different - this is clearly visible in the photo.

[evil hamster]

Because for this you need to throw out the entire tower, torsion bars, tracks and the engine. And we will have one building. And it’s stupidly easier to cook a new one - less labor.

[Canep]

The most radical thing that appeared on the tank is the installation of one of the world's best multi-channel sight "Sosna-U", with a thermal imager. As a result, the gunner-operator is now able to hit targets, including guided missiles, at any time of the day, regardless of dust, smoke and other adverse conditions. The sight has an automatic target tracking, which greatly facilitates the shooter's work.

Apparently, the range of the sight at night is 5 km. Interestingly, there is something similar on the Abrams.

[Krasnoyarsk]

Abrams hammer twice as far.

[Canep]

I think five kilometers is enough farther from the cannon anyway, no further shooting. More may be needed only for flyers, the horizon is 6 km.

[cth; fyn]

Well, he can’t take 5 km in the afternoon, but ours only with a racket, and she has fixed armor-piercing at all distances.

[Krasnoyarsk]

And what is it better? The warriors were shocked by the t-72b3, everything is old, there is no modernization as such.

[cth; fyn]

Fixed Achaeles heel T-72, because The T-72 was created as a cheaper tank than the T-80, and the sights with optics had a lower quality, because he was assigned the role of a mobilization tank and cannon fodder, now on it is Sosna-u, one of the best tank sights.

[Krasnoyarsk]

Does the tower act as a kick panel?

[cth; fyn]

Only ammunition not placed in the carousel detonates, and the fault is not in the tank, but in the charges themselves. they burn out and do not have a sleeve protecting them from detonation; in Grozny, tanks withstood an average of 14 RPG hits and "survived", although they changed several crews.

[Die-hard]

Yes, the separate-shell loading pretty spoiled the combat survivability of the tank. In general, except for the Eastern tanks and Challenger 2 (which, incidentally, is the apotheosis of shitty without analogues - what is only one rifled gun worth), nobody uses them, which in general is very sad, looking at modern unitary NATO long crowbars.

[Kars]

Quote: Inflexible

except for the Eastern tanks and Challenger 2 (which, incidentally, is the apotheosis of hell without analogues - which costs only one rifled gun)

Wow, a rifled gun than something the specialist didn’t please)))))))) can still be laid in .. wet .. armored panels are not suitable for something

[Die-hard]

BOPS same. The rifled gun is not very friendly with him, unlike OFS. Yes, and it’s not enough, it impels the British to fasten some ATGM to the upgrade - oh, they are being tuned with these rifling, oh, are tuned.

[Kars]

Quote: Inflexible

BOPS same. The rifled gun is not very friendly with him, unlike OFS. Yes, and it’s not enough, it impels the British to fasten some ATGM to the upgrade - oh, they are being tuned with these rifling, oh, are tuned.

They would have taught the materiel, maybe they would not have told such tales.
for example, why would Pturs go on cutting? how could Jews make ATGM Lahat under a 105 mm rifled gun

The ammunition types which are currently or formerly in use include:

APFSDS L23. This has a monobloc tungsten nickel copper long rod penetrator, and used the L8 combustible case charge, although it can use a modified L14 charge. The muzzle velocity is 1,534 meter per second (5,030 ft / s). It was used in the Gulf War, but is now probably withdrawn.
APFSDS L26 (alias CHARM 1). This has a depleted uranium (DU) long rod penetrator and uses the L14A1 or L14A2 combustible case charges.
APFSDS L27A1 (alias CHARM 3). This also has a DU projectile, but with a greater length-to-diameter ratio and is thus "significantly more effective". The round uses the L16A1 combustible case charge.

Do you know how to decrypt APFSDS?

[Lopatov]

You climbed into the jungle. It's much easier. The Nona's rifled gun fires 120mm mines with absolutely no problems.
And ATGM can be launched not only from rifled and smooth trunks, but also without a barrel at all.

[Aleks tv]

Although I served the lion's share of the time on the T-72B and I am a fan of this machine, I think that removing the T-80BV from the troops is not an entirely competent decision. Upgrade electronics and sights, strengthen armor protection - yes, but do not remove. Only with the full development of the possibility of overhaul.
It’s just possible to write off older equipment, rather than the unique T-80.

As for me, the modernization of T.-72: to put a good thermal imager with the possibility of multi-channel sight at the gunner and a stabilized panoramic view from the commander. Plus coded radio communication and circular reinforcement of armor protection. That's what we dreamed about, and everything else is just gadgets, albeit important, but not basic. Maybe he said rudely, but it was offhand which was immediately remembered.

The T-80BV has not exhausted the reserve of modernization, if we change it, then on the T-90MS and not on the upgraded T-72Б.

[APOCALIPTIC]

Quote: Aleks tv

The T-80BV has not exhausted the reserve of modernization, if we change it, then on the T-90MS.

I advise you to read about, good, T-90 Sami already refuses to buy, well, Africa will descend
http://www.newsru.com/russia/14feb2012/t90.html

[Aleks tv]

I advise you not to read what is not clear, but to serve 10 for years on TV.

Politicians have politics, they have kickbacks and chairs under their asses on their minds.
Factories have business, they have money on their minds.
And what is necessary for tankers on "hardware" I wrote above. Colleagues will add.

T-90ms is very good, only a little expensive of course.
But it’s too early to remove the T-80 from the troops, only to modernize.

[Cynic]

Quote: Aleks tv

But it’s too early to remove the T-80 from the troops, only to modernize.

Yes, who will go for it !!!
If the first 90s were the level of 80s, then if you modernize the filling and protection of the same T-80U, then even Tagil, literally and figuratively, will again be below the line. And the eternal Russian question will arise.

[ramzes1776]

Quote: APOCALIPTIC

I advise you to read about, good, T-90 Sami already refuses to buy, well, Africa will descend

It was a year ago, when the tandem of Makarka and Serdyuk ruled the ball. They wanted everything that was ours and praised everything that was not ours.

[Alekseev]

Absolutely accurate definition!
Such modernization (the main thermal imager, aiming and surveillance devices, communications and remote sensing) as a temporary measure to maintain the benefits tank units and the loading of production capacities (there’s no part ) will come down before the commissioning of a new tank of the 21st century.

[Die-hard]

Not exhausted, but nevertheless there are a number of problems with the T-80BV, one of which is the loading mechanism, or rather the impossibility of its modernization for new, long shells.

[Aleks tv]

Yes, AZ is easier to operate than MOH. There are fewer failures in the AZ, there is no need to mess with hydraulics, there is less risk of jamming the conveyor with PCT sleeves and getting into the mechanic's gearbox in the T-72. As well as the charges around the gunner with the commander do not show off.
But nevertheless, the T-80BV is quite a serious and knowledge-intensive machine, so that the crew on the T-80 should be trained more seriously to write it off at the moment.

And the length of the shells can not be changed either in the AZ or in the MOH in existing transporters without reducing the cells of the shots.

[Die-hard]

In addition to dancing with the Ministry of Health, there is another problem - it is called the GTD-1000TF. Its production was stopped in the union, the mobile reserves were exhausted, most of the repair kits remained for the more modern T-80U.

[cth; fyn]

Of course, Tagil crushed competitors, which is not buzzing.

[cth; fyn]

I think if you get busy and do some serious work, then it is quite possible to make a new AZ.

[Cynic]

Quote: Aleks tv

Only with the full development of the possibility of overhaul.

But where, like the most important thing than?

[redwar6]

And soon the T-70FBBVUUMD-15/3 will appear, I feel.

[Ivan Tarasov]

A tank that has projectile catchers in the frontal part of the tower on either side of the barrel cannot be considered modern.
And he "flies" or jumps - it doesn't matter.
The tank must be protected first of all.
So, we expect the T-90 MS in the troops (as a temporary measure), until a full-fledged modern tank appears.

[DDW]

Doesn't matter what flies or jumps?
I do not agree.
In the folds of the terrain, it is difficult to get into something that "jumps and flies".
In the exercises on such machines (with a competent crew), it’s even possible to aim at, not to get into ...
And the Chinese type 99 with all its armor was crawling like an excellent target. Neither dynamics, nor maneuver, nor speed, reaching the target head-on, etc. ... Maybe not the first time, but at these speeds he will be hit. And even hitting a simple blank in a case will cost him a lot ...

[ramzes1776]

Quote: Ivan Tarasov

So, we expect the T-90 MS in the troops (as a temporary measure), until a full-fledged modern tank appears.

There will be no deliveries of T-90 MS. Everyone is waiting for "Armata".

[evil hamster]

Absolutely all serial MBT in the world have a weakened zone around the gun.

[cth; fyn]

I already wrote on warfailes that you can put any stuffing on a tank, let's put on the T-80 "Relic", "Sosna-U", brand new electronics (walkie-talkies, a computer with BIUS ballistic digital computer) and the T-72, and the T-90 deflated, and if there are still normal steel side screens with the Relic, finally smoke Tagil aside.

[flanker7]

The pepper is clear! 80-ka as it is is a cut above all 72, as they say, at the genetic level. Powerful and reliable car. Yes, just beautiful. So it was, is and will be!

[Cynic]

Quote: flanker7

80 in the form as it is a cut above all 72

Truth shrouded in darkness for many.
Chiit’s fashionable to blame everything Soviet and fool those who worked in the defense industry, developed weapons and served in the army.

Quote: flanker7

a cut above all 72, as they say, at the genetic level

After all, the heir.

[MEWTWO]

it's not so bad

[Ivan Mokhovikov]

Replace normal tanks with all sorts of shit