Military Review

How from T-90 did "cheap stuff", or About filing facts

455
At the end of last week, another controversial article was circulated in the Russian-language segment of the Internet, “exposing” the alleged problems of Russian tanks. A material with a loud and even scandalous headline “Experts called the Russian T-90S tank“ cheap ”described the current situation on the global arms market and made conclusions about the reasons for its particular features. For a person who does not understand much about this topic, the arguments presented may seem correct, which will entail a corresponding reaction. However, upon careful consideration, the facts mentioned in the article in most cases are not interpreted correctly, but in such a way as to put domestic equipment in the required light.


How from T-90 did "cheap stuff", or About filing facts


First, it is worth briefly retell the theses announced in the article under review, “Experts called the Russian T-90С tank" cheap. " At the very beginning of the material, the authors, referring to some unnamed experts, declare the main tank T-90C “cheap”, but immediately define this term. The reason for the use of such a word is called the lowest cost among the rest of the equipment of this class on the market. So, with an average cost of MBT about 4,5 million US dollars, one Russian T-90С will cost the customer no more than three million. For comparison, the prices of other tanks, to some extent similar to the Russian ones. The Polish PT-91 Twardy costs about 7 million dollars, and the Ukrainian Oplot-M costs about half a million less.

As the main reason for the relative cheapness of the Russian armored vehicles, the authors of the publication cited the use of technologies already developed by Uralvagonzavod in the production of T-72 family tanks, which became the basis for the T-90. Due to this, over the past 12 years, the plant operating in Nizhny Tagil was able to export more than a thousand tanks of this type. Thus, the T-90 has become the most successful tank in recent years in the international market. Sold tanks serve in the armies of India (the largest buyer), Algeria, Turkmenistan, Uganda and other developing countries or third world countries.

Finally, the authors of the publication drew attention to the combat capabilities of the armored vehicle. It is noted that the T-90 is the main threat to the armored forces of NATO, because of which the Alliance countries were forced to develop appropriate anti-tank weapons. As an example of readiness to repel an attack of Russian tanks, the material contains certain “third-generation missiles” that the Blind complex of optical-electronic suppression can no longer fight. It is also alleged that the capabilities of the Arena active defense system do not allow the tank to be protected from sub-caliber projectiles and attack cores of cumulative ammunition. The last claim to protect the T-90 concerns the lack of serious protection against attacks from the upper hemisphere, which, it is claimed, makes the Russian tank unsuitable for use in wartime conditions.


Tank T-90C. Photo militaryrussia.ru / worldwide-defence.blogspot.com


It is not difficult to suspect an article in a tendentious presentation of facts in order to form the necessary attitude to the T-90 tank in the reader. Even in the part of the material where the successes of Russian tanks on the international market are superficially examined, a specific attitude to these combat vehicles is felt. The mere fact of such a submission of information is the reason for the appropriate attitude to the article.

A quick search on the Internet allows you to find the source of the publication - the Military Informer website. The author of the article is not listed, but there are two links to sources of information. The information disclosed in the material was taken from news Portal "Lenta.ru" and reprints notes from the agency Newsru.com. These publications appeared in the fall of 2012 and 2010, respectively. Thus, it is possible to draw conclusions about the freshness and relevance of the data presented.

Last year's news from Lenti.ru told about the record of the T-90С tank and the Uralvagonzavod enterprise producing it. Thus, in the period from 2001 to 2010, the Nizhny Tagil plant built and transferred to a third country over a thousand units of this type of armored vehicles. According to the experts of Uralvagonzavod, this sales volume made the T-90 the most commercially successful MBT of the past decade. The facts cited in the news about the record of Russian tank building went into the article “Experts called the Russian T-90С tank cheap” almost unchanged - only specific wordings were corrected.

News from the portal Newsru.com already when reading the headline allows you to guess why the author of the website "Military informer" called his article that way, and not otherwise. The fact is that the material from 17 of September 2010 of the year, which described the situation in the global market of armored vehicles, was called "Russia ranks first in the world in the export of tanks at the expense of" backward "technology. An interesting feature of this article is the fact that, under a somewhat provocative heading, contains a balanced story about Russian contracts for the sale of tanks from 2006 to 2009 a year. During this period, our country sold 482 new tanks totaling just under 1,6 billion dollars. In addition, the forecast provided by the World Trade Analysis Center weapons (TSAMTO), according to which from 2010 to 2013 year, these figures could reach 859 tanks for 2,75 billion dollars.

The quantitative aspects of tank building and export, covered in the article "Military informer" almost without changes were taken from both sources. As for the conclusions about the inability of T-90 and its modifications to fully operate in the conditions of the modern war, they were also borrowed from the 2010 publication of the year without any serious corrections. The article “Russia ranks first in the world in the export of tanks at the expense of“ backward ”equipment” concludes with the theses about the unsuitability to real use of the “Shtora” and “Arena” complexes, as well as the lack of protection of the tank against attacks from above. Prior to these conclusions, it contains reflections on the pace of rearmament of the Russian tank forces.


T-90 with KAZ "Arena"


It is worth noting that in the case of statements about the combat capabilities of the T-90 tanks, the most difficult situation is emerging. These armored vehicles have not yet met in real combat with advanced foreign anti-tank systems, which does not allow to draw the right conclusions. The only conclusion in this context that may appear in the existing conditions of lack of information concerns the protection of the tank against attacks from above. At present, not a single tank in the world can effectively counter such threats. Therefore, it turns out that the Russian T-90 in this parameter are not inferior and do not exceed foreign equipment.

In the absence of detailed information, it remains to rely only on different estimates, which, for obvious reasons, can be very different. Manufacturers of tanks and anti-tank weapons, promoting their development, in every way embellish their capabilities. This feature of the defense industry of any country eventually becomes the cause of the emergence of numerous disputes on the topic “who or what is better?”. In this case, it remains to leave the negative assessments of Russian tanks on the conscience of the authors of the original publication on the Newsru.com website.

The last topic to consider is experts. According to the headline of the article with criticism, it was some experts who recognized the T-90 as “cheap.” Even with a cursory review of the two news, which became the basis for the “devastating” publication, you can see that they only refer to one specialist in the field of trade in armaments and military equipment. The only expert whose words are cited in two articles is the head of TSAMTO I. Korotchenko. Apparently, it was he who told Newsru.com journalists about the situation in the global tank market. However, he did not give any assessment of the quality of a particular technique. Thus, it turns out that experts who have called T-90 “cheap” do not have a specific name and do not seem to exist at all.

As a result, the article with the loud title “Experts called the Russian tank T-90С“ cheap ”” is a collection of fairly old and long-known facts, richly “flavored” with questionable and controversial details of unclear origin. In this regard, it remains once again to remind readers of the importance of verifying information provided by one or other publications or Internet resources. As for the conformity of the article to reality, then let these problems remain on the conscience of those authors who have some data, in order to please some wishes or reasons, turn into others.


Related links:
http://military-informant.com/index.php/army/3305-1.html
http://lenta.ru/news/2012/10/09/t90/
http://riw.ru/russia_polit57921.html
http://newsru.com/russia/17sep2010/rating_export.html
Author:
455 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. tronin.maxim
    tronin.maxim 30 July 2013 07: 04
    65
    Whatever information attacks on the t-90, it is the best! Many countries, buyers know this, for example, India, which conducted stringent tests for the tank! Let the enemies look or try our tank, and everyone can pour mud (although here it must be taken into account that they are paid money for this).
    1. Corsair
      Corsair 30 July 2013 07: 21
      21
      Quote: tronin.maxim
      Let the enemies look or test our tank

      We are working on enemies, as we have worked out more than once and to help us the best tanks and the best people in them ...
      P / S:And we are also waiting for "Armata"
      1. My doctor
        My doctor 30 July 2013 18: 03
        +4
        The best ???? dvoechnik do not shame !!!
    2. ShturmKGB
      ShturmKGB 30 July 2013 10: 11
      13
      This is all the machinations of enemies ... envy!
      1. Russ69
        Russ69 30 July 2013 10: 58
        31
        The title of the article, for the article itself, is somewhat incorrect. In principle, all "cheapness", according to the author, lies in its price but, no matter how quality.
        If you look soberly at the article, it turns out the T-90S, with similar qualities to other MBTs, wins in addition in price.
        1. German
          German 30 July 2013 14: 03
          +4
          I wonder what kind of "smart guy" minus "russ69" - absolutely right "russ" said and therefore: definitely +++
        2. luka095
          luka095 30 July 2013 19: 34
          17
          The title of the article was made by specialists in information warfare. Any Russian-speaking person with the word "cheap" will think not about the price, but about the quality indicators. That's what it is designed for! And the anonymity of the article - well, the authors don't want to subscribe - they are at war!
        3. Simon
          Simon 30 July 2013 20: 37
          +6
          You can make a tank of gold, it will be very expensive, but can it be fought on it? request Dear tank, this does not say that it is the best, but since they buy our cheap tanks, it means they are valued. good
        4. Mohomax
          Mohomax 2 August 2013 20: 00
          +2
          The best hardware at the best price, we have reason to be proud of, and these articles are a sign of powerlessness, so that neither radioactive abrams nor expensive leopards can compete and the language does not turn to call them invulnerable
      2. svp67
        svp67 30 July 2013 13: 04
        13
        ShturmKGB
        This is all the machinations of enemies ... envy!
        Yes. envy - the number of sales and will do everything to intercept our current and promising markets. Therefore, our side needs to offer a new, better version of the T90 every two years and hurry up with testing and adopting the "Armata"
      3. Apologet.Ru
        Apologet.Ru 30 July 2013 13: 14
        18
        hi
        Quote
        This is all the machinations of enemies ... envy!

        One must be proud of the minds and hands that have made and are making such a technique - for centuries!
        For any nation, only such nations, I’ve miscalculated two times, it’s pride, and for their opponents it’s envious jealousy.
        And we have us and everything else is also present!
        So let their saliva choke with envy and envious eyes let them crawl out ...
      4. vlrosch
        vlrosch 30 July 2013 20: 16
        -7
        There is nothing to envy. The tank enters the troops incomplete defense and defense systems, nipped. Take a look at the third shot and see for yourself.
        In general, how much can Morozovsky T-64 be upgraded?
        1. Vereshagin
          Vereshagin 30 July 2013 21: 26
          14
          You are “wildly” mistaken. Tanks, as well as other equipment, enter the troops in the configuration ordered by the MO and T-90 is not a T-64 clone and is not a development of the KKBM A.A. Morozov
      5. edge
        edge 5 August 2013 17: 30
        0
        ShturmKGB
        This is all the machinations of enemies ... envy

        absolutely true remark. Nothing personal, just business. Obey, you look and buyers will rush for the most expensive product at the expense of efficiency
    3. aksakal
      aksakal 30 July 2013 10: 21
      24
      Quote: tronin.maxim
      Whatever information attacks on the t-90, it is the best! Many countries, buyers know this, for example, India, which conducted stringent tests for the tank! Let the enemies look or try our tank, and everyone can pour mud (although here it must be taken into account that they are paid money for this).

      - Don’t worry, News.Ru is an essentialist site. There is also such a division of News.Co.IL. - almost the same in content. I do not want to once again hurt the Israeli comrades, but this alone is that the News.Ru Zionist site already clearly says that this site cannot be trusted. This is already a brand - a Unionist honey-resource - an extremely false media resource, verified by many years of reading and observation. There is not a single NON-RESPONSIBLE resource controlled by the Zionists. Goebbels did not smoke nearby, baby, pants on the straps. Therefore, do not read materials from there or read, but draw exactly the opposite conclusions and you will get the relative truth.
      1. Black Colonel
        Black Colonel 30 July 2013 13: 20
        +5
        The point is not to believe or not to believe, but in whose interests it is written there.
        1. Kapdva
          Kapdva 30 July 2013 23: 50
          +3
          Well, certainly not in Russian !!!
    4. Constantine
      Constantine 30 July 2013 10: 42
      +9
      Quote: tronin.maxim
      Whatever information attacks on the t-90, it is the best! Many countries, buyers know this, for example, India, which conducted stringent tests for the tank! Let the enemies look or try our tank, and everyone can pour mud (although here it must be taken into account that they are paid money for this).


      We all know that he is good, but the goal of such scribblers is less sophisticated people. After their work, every now and then you hear from many who are used to putting the truth of the authorities higher than the authority of the truth that "Everything is gone, the plaster is being removed, the client is leaving" and it's time for me to dump, etc. On this calculation. Create a negative image for your state, and for yourself, an inferiority complex. sad

      You need to put them on a stake, or at least fight with articles such as this, but, unfortunately, the resources for distributing such articles are not enough sad
    5. zvereok
      zvereok 30 July 2013 10: 47
      11
      I would have watched the Abrams fighting in urban conditions, how the rivers are being forced. And in the field Abrams does not exceed T90. Of course, Teshka has jambs, but Abrams is not enough.
      1. bazilio
        bazilio 30 July 2013 13: 21
        26
        Quote: zvereok
        I would have watched the Abrams fighting in urban conditions, how the rivers are being forced. And in the field Abrams does not exceed T90. Of course, Teshka has jambs, but Abrams is not enough.

        Comrades, this is not so simple. First of all, you need to identify, why was the T-90 created? The T-90 is a continuation of the T-72 line and according to the tasks laid down in the design, it corresponds to the tasks of almost all tanks of the post-war period - a massive breakthrough of the defense of European countries and a quick exit to the English Channel (remember the Soviet tank group in Germany). The T-90, like its progenitor T-72, was planned as a mass tank. At the same time, the tank was not supposed to be too heavy, but to be able to use the existing bridges. All this suggests that the tank should not be heavy and, as a result, its protection could not be strengthened by a banal increase in the thickness (and therefore weight) of the armor. In addition, more weight requires the installation of a more powerful engine, otherwise, more weight will reduce speed performance. As for me, the T-90 has an optimal design for a tank of mass breakthrough. Another aspect when comparing TTX is T 90 and abrams. Both tanks were created for battles on the European theater of operations - the terrain is very rugged and it will not always be possible to fully realize the tank performance. For example, the T 90 can hit targets with a Kitol missile at a distance of up to 5 km. Guidance on the laser beam obliges you to keep the target in the sight of the sight. And if the battles are fought in a wooded or hilly area, where visibility is limited to 1-1,5 km, then such an indicator as max. the range of defeat is losing its relevance. I do not argue, and in Europe there are flat areas. I’m all about the fact that just comparing tanks according to performance characteristics without taking into account the purposes for which they were created and the conditions in which they are used is not entirely correct.
        1. Rakti-kali
          Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 14: 44
          +8
          Quote: bazilio
          For example, the T 90 can hit targets with a Kitolov missile at a distance of up to 5 km

          Reflex-M complex, Invar and Invar-M rockets.
        2. Vereshagin
          Vereshagin 30 July 2013 21: 33
          +3
          You made a reservation! Kitolov is a guided artillery shell ...
        3. zvereok
          zvereok 2 August 2013 00: 43
          +1
          I agree with almost everything you said (with the exception of tanks in urban conditions), and at the same time on "Both tanks were created for battles in the European theater of operations - the terrain is very rugged" Here the T90 will give odds to the Abrams.
      2. Simon
        Simon 30 July 2013 20: 45
        +2
        Shoals, in the process of working with the tank, our engineers quickly eliminate. This they can do well. How many times did the T-34 modernize during World War II?
        1. shasherin_pavel
          shasherin_pavel 2 August 2013 07: 21
          +3
          1.T-34 with an L-11 cannon. 2.with an F-32 cannon. 3. T-34-57 small series. 4. T-34S with a five-speed gearbox and new clutches with reinforced air filters. 5. T-34 with a 43g "Nut" turret. 5. T-34 with a commander's cupola. 6. Т -34 -85 with two variants of guns .. These are only serial tanks.
          Poles after the war put a 34mm gun on the T-100.
    6. Apologet.Ru
      Apologet.Ru 30 July 2013 13: 11
      14
      hi
      Well, if the media began to groan Russian military equipment or weapons, then what?
      That's right!
      Someone really needs this, and this someone wants to foist their "hardware" in spite of Russian weapons.
      Well, and for the media, as one of the oldest professions, there is the opportunity to get hold of the order and patriotism is not to do with it when the conversation is about “grandmas”.
      No?
      Yes, so there is nothing new about this assault, forgive me, colleagues, for my French, there is no domestic weapon and everything must be taken calmly, perceiving the flowing information shit from the angle 180 * ...
      1. vladimir VR
        vladimir VR 30 July 2013 13: 33
        +4
        To the point! A negative article is an elementary order with one goal: to denigrate our tank and influence the demand on the arms market, in the end.
        1. cdrt
          cdrt 30 July 2013 16: 30
          13
          There is even a whole Tarasenko website dedicated to "the fight against monopoly", but in reality the fight against the Russian tank industry and its sales.
          It is clear who the enthusiasts on this site are rogue, and it is clear that it is paid by the people who control the Ukrainian. the defense industry.
          Is it that ears stick out from there? wink
          1. Apologet.Ru
            Apologet.Ru 30 July 2013 18: 41
            +6
            hi
            Quote cdrt
            Is it that ears stick out from there?

            And not only ears, but also bad breath ...
      2. PValery53
        PValery53 30 July 2013 20: 24
        +2
        You have succeeded in "French"! ..
    7. AVV
      AVV 30 July 2013 16: 21
      +6
      Competition gentlemen, competition and nothing more, the T-90 has surpassed in terms of price and combat capabilities many of the models offered on the market, and so there are paid articles !!!!
      1. grafrozow
        grafrozow 30 July 2013 22: 49
        +1
        Quote: AVV
        Competition gentlemen, competition and nothing more, the T-90 has surpassed in terms of price and combat capabilities many of the models offered on the market, and so there are paid articles !!!!

        The same thing with our helicopter, at the air show in France. An old tale.
    8. KazaK Bo
      KazaK Bo 30 July 2013 20: 11
      +2
      Quote: tronin.maxim
      Let the enemies look or test our tank, and anyone can spill mud

      LET'S PLAY! After all, the allocated grants must be worked out. So they write "order".
      And the inconsistency of this article is visible from the mere number of export deliveries of these tanks ... Reliability, simplicity, high combat capabilities, a relatively low price for "luxury options" ... and the article ... yes, let them slander ...
    9. Suhov
      Suhov 1 August 2013 00: 42
      +1
      To reliably find out whose technique is better
      tenders should be carried out in the form of "fighting without rules".
      To the winner - a supply contract.
    10. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 1 August 2013 04: 35
      +4
      any tank can be taken out of the game, it is also important who controls it .. and both "merkava" and abrams "burn perfectly ...
    11. Doctorleg
      Doctorleg 28 August 2013 09: 56
      0
      Something is doubtful that money is paid for it. There are no tank buyers among readers of such articles - this is not a vacuum cleaner or a car
  2. smart ass
    smart ass 30 July 2013 07: 27
    39
    Here is the current on our tanks inappropriately! I myself live in Tagil ... all ride them no one frowns !!!
    1. tronin.maxim
      tronin.maxim 30 July 2013 08: 38
      16
      Quote: Clever man
      ... everyone drives them

      It was like a video tank flies across the road, but we have enough Schumacher! lol Arrange a tank dakar silk road. Our tank with our crazy driver would be out of competition! laughing
      1. German
        German 30 July 2013 14: 08
        10
        And the dope driver pour 500 grams, so he’s doing it all at all! And most importantly, DO NOT HAVE IT! laughing
        laughing
        1. Andrey Yuryevich
          Andrey Yuryevich 1 August 2013 11: 32
          +2
          the main thing here is not to "interfere", but to hide .... laughing
      2. kotvov
        kotvov 3 August 2013 11: 49
        +2
        and you think that someone will go to a comparative test? Yes, this will not happen in life. The teshka will do these vaunted and advertised, and then what.
    2. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 30 July 2013 13: 22
      +3
      all ride them no one frowns !!!
      Right in the streets? belay
      1. smart ass
        smart ass 30 July 2013 13: 40
        +6
        Of course, along the streets) that year the snow was removed, also on them
    3. vladimir VR
      vladimir VR 30 July 2013 13: 36
      +6
      Great car, served on it.
    4. grafrozow
      grafrozow 30 July 2013 22: 51
      +1
      Quote: Clever man
      Here is the current on our tanks inappropriately! I myself live in Tagil ... all ride them no one frowns !!!

      I saw a video on YouTube + drinks
  3. Crang
    Crang 30 July 2013 07: 30
    +3
    T-90 is a very cool tank. Eliminate the jambs in protecting the side, and in general there would be no price.
  4. 77bob1973
    77bob1973 30 July 2013 07: 32
    +6
    Are Chinese tanks more expensive? Maybe Abrams, Leopard are more protected from above?
    1. Crang
      Crang 30 July 2013 07: 37
      14 th
      The Abrams is better protected from the side.
      1. tronin.maxim
        tronin.maxim 30 July 2013 08: 27
        +9
        Quote: Krang
        The Abrams is better protected from the side.

        Only in Afghanistan did this not help him!
        1. Denis
          Denis 30 July 2013 11: 04
          +9
          Quote: tronin.maxim
          Only in Afghanistan did this not help him!

          Because Abrams is fighting., You can knock out any tank.
          1. svp67
            svp67 30 July 2013 13: 06
            +7
            Quote: Denis
            Because Abrams is fighting., You can knock out any tank.

            So our tanks rarely stand idle ...
            1. Armata
              Armata 30 July 2013 20: 09
              +3
              Quote: svp67
              So our tanks rarely stand idle ..
              T90 have not yet entered the battle. And then Soviet and then Russian tanks are offensive, but all NATO countries and Amers are more oriented towards defense. Draw conclusions what are the advantages in the offensive and defense.
          2. NOBODY EXCEPT US
            NOBODY EXCEPT US 3 August 2013 23: 23
            0
            right Denis, I think so until the tank is tested in a real battle, not according to the CTO system but in a real battle, did the T-90 have such a big thing? And you can write anything, if you judge Povetkin, it makes no sense to fight Klitschko in terms of Klitschko’s performance, but there can be anything ... therefore, until there is real evidence of superiority, they will write what they want, and so far no offense, Abrams is at war and T-90 only at the training ground ....
            1. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 3 August 2013 23: 52
              0
              Quote: NOBODY BUT US
              in the meantime, no offense, Abrams is fighting and the T-90 only at the training ground ....

              Once again I meet this statement ....
              When it’s profitable, they say about the T-90 that it’s only the 18th reincarnation of the T-72 tank, and when it’s not profitable, the T-90 seems to have fallen from the sky, a completely new development, and its developers know only theoretically about tank battles .
      2. Alexey
        Alexey 30 July 2013 08: 51
        19
        You are very mistaken. Just Abrams has a weak side protection. The forage of the tower, the side of the hull in the MTO area ... are very poorly protected. In general, the T72 with rubber screens is not inferior to Abrams in board protection (the thickness of the side armor of the T72 is higher), but the T90 is noticeably superior to it.
        1. Crang
          Crang 30 July 2013 12: 05
          0
          Quote: Alex
          The forage of the tower, the side of the hull in the MTO area ... are very poorly protected.

          I know how they are protected down to millimeters. And about the T-90 too. But I would like to hear about "Abrams" first from you. As for the T-90, its side hull projection in the center and stern is protected similar like the T-72A without any differences. If you don’t know why talk? Can you give me the numbers?
          1. Remko
            Remko 31 July 2013 03: 00
            -2
            Nenad give all sorts of numbers. Shout the loudest: Glory to the Russian tanks and you will be bombarded with pluses. After all, it’s not tankers who gathered here, but the political leaders. smile
            1. svp67
              svp67 31 July 2013 03: 04
              +6
              Quote: Remko
              Nenad give all sorts of numbers. Shout the loudest: Glory to the Russian tanks and you will be bombarded with pluses.
              And you try and get ready for the fact that the Ukrainian opposition instantly "minus" ...
            2. family tree
              family tree 31 July 2013 19: 32
              +1
              Quote: Remko
              Nenad give all sorts of numbers. Shout the loudest: Glory to the Russian tanks and you will be bombarded with pluses. After all, it’s not tankers who gathered here, but the political leaders. smile

              That's who he quietly hated, yes. But dragging Major Pindas, such a surname, I don’t know if he’s alive, but man. As they say, I will subscribe for it
      3. LaGlobal
        LaGlobal 30 July 2013 09: 36
        +7
        Quote: Krang
        The Abrams is better protected from the side.


        - then I'm the president of Atlantis! I do not know the performance characteristics of tanks (domestic or foreign), but I confidently declare, referring to the opinions of experts and articles, that our tank, nevertheless, surpasses foreign analogues and even if it is not so sophisticated.

        And you, in turn, are a DILETANT, the same as me, declaring what you wrote above!

        During the military intervention, the fucking west into Iraq and Afghanistan, the Taliban destroyed their tanks, from our RPGs of the 70 year of release! And you will tell me that abrams and the like are better protected from the BOARD! Do not tell my cat.
        PS all the world!
        1. Crang
          Crang 30 July 2013 12: 06
          -2
          Quote: LaGlobal
          I do not know the performance characteristics of tanks (domestic or foreign), but I declare with confidence

          And where is the certainty if you don’t know? And you say you don’t know? It looks like manic obstinacy.
          1. LaGlobal
            LaGlobal 30 July 2013 15: 42
            +2
            Quote: Krang
            And where is the certainty if you don’t know?


            read my post to the end with punctuation marks.
            1. Crang
              Crang 30 July 2013 16: 24
              -2
              Read. Immediately struck by this:
              Quote: LaGlobal
              I do not know the performance characteristics of tanks (domestic or foreign), but I confidently declare, referring to the opinions of experts and articles, that our tank, nevertheless, surpasses foreign analogues and even if it is not so sophisticated.

              This is absurd. I know that the T-90 is better than the Abrams, but the side of the hull is better protected. Where is the contradiction? If I am an amateur, then you are a dense ignoramus. you don't even understand the logic. Or just a woman.
              1. Andrey Yuryevich
                Andrey Yuryevich 1 August 2013 11: 34
                +2
                RPG-9 makes an abram at a time in Bochin. so you're wrong ....
          2. nikolaxp
            nikolaxp 30 July 2013 19: 05
            +1
            And you watch the video on YouTube how the praised abrams burn from one shot of an RPG and how in Syria the T72 withstand hits of up to 3 RPGs in a row and then leave the firing zone.
            In the modern world, when there is an ATGM to say that one tank is "better protected from the side" than another is ridiculous and does not matter, especially for the owner of the ATGM.
            I understand that if the debate was about the survival of tanks, and even then under the condition that they have dynamic protection and KAZ
      4. Rakti-kali
        Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 11: 26
        +5
        Quote: Krang
        The Abrams is better protected from the side.

        And what is the "best" armor "Abrams" in the side projection?
        1. Crang
          Crang 30 July 2013 13: 16
          0
          Spaced armor with a greater total thickness than the T-90. Better the side of the Abrams hull is reserved only for the T-72B side - and only against cumulative ammunition. In kinetic terms, approximate parity. In this regard, the T-90 is doing worse: 80mmB + 10mmRE versus 32mmB + 25,4mmB + 70mmB for the "Abrams". Well, the T-72B has 80mmB + 10mmRE + 4S20 ~ equivalent to 200-250mm from HEAT ammunition.
          1. Kars
            Kars 30 July 2013 13: 20
            +8
            Quote: Krang
            70mm

            It is interesting to know the equivalent of these 70 mm
            1. Crang
              Crang 30 July 2013 13: 56
              0
              We are talking about side protection. housing... That the T-90, that the Abrashi does not have a combined armor, but only a spacer + DZ in the case of ours.
              "Abrams"
              32mmB + 25,4mmB + 70mmB = 127,4mm
              equivalent
              1. From KS ~ 180-200mm.
              2. From BOPS 127mm.

              T-90
              80mmB + 10mmRE = 90mm
              equivalent
              1. From COP ~ 150mm.
              2. From BOPS 80mm.

              T-72B
              80mmB + 10mRE + 4S20
              equivalent
              1. From KS ~ 200-250mm.
              2. From BOPS 100mm.

              The side of the tower at both in the region of 400-500mm from BOPS.
              1. Kars
                Kars 30 July 2013 14: 07
                +2
                Quote: Krang
                We are talking about the protection of the hull.

                And I'm talking about this. Or will you say that the side screen of Abrams is 70 mm of homogeneous armor?
                Quote: Krang
                The side of the tower at both in the region of 400-500mm from BOPS.

                Abrashi thinks more, especially when you consider the container for spare parts
                1. Crang
                  Crang 30 July 2013 14: 19
                  -1
                  Quote: Kars
                  And I'm talking about this. Or will you say that the side screen of Abrams is 70 mm of homogeneous armor?

                  Yes, a continuous screen of homogeneous armor thickness according to various sources from 60mm, 65mm or 70mm. There is a possibility that 70mm is in the front, and 60mm in the MTO area. There is no pie there.
                  Quote: Kars
                  Abrashi thinks more, especially when you consider the container for spare parts

                  A container of spare parts is located at the stern of the tower, where there is almost no armor.
                  1. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 14: 28
                    +3
                    Quote: Krang
                    Yes a solid screen of homogeneous armor with a thickness of

                    I posted a picture for whom?
                    Quote: Krang
                    A container of spare parts is located at the stern of the tower, where there is almost no armor.

                    There is plenty of armor, and half-spaced apart. Once the BK screens


                    I will repeat the picture with the increase))) Maybe this is not the screen of Abrams?))))
                    1. Crang
                      Crang 30 July 2013 14: 34
                      0
                      This is a rare modification with cement between two thin sheets. Against the COP for better, but worse from BOPS.
                      Quote: Kars
                      There is plenty of armor, and half-spaced apart. Once the BK screens

                      There is almost none there. Special reservation packages reach only the partition and protect only the inhabited premises of the tower. Further thin monolith + spare parts (trellised). Our spare parts boxes are solid and, provided they are filled with stones, they protect well.
                      1. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 14: 39
                        +1
                        Quote: Krang
                        This is a rare modification with cement between two thin sheets. Against the COP for better, but worse from BOP

                        they are all like that and it is based on polyurethane.
                        Quote: Krang
                        There is almost none there. Special booking packages reach only the partitions

                        it is full of armor and there is no need to focus on special armor packages
                        Quote: Krang
                        Spare parts (trellised).
                        trellis is feed
                      2. Crang
                        Crang 30 July 2013 14: 54
                        0
                        Quote: Kars
                        it is full of armor and there is no need to focus on special armor packages

                        There the armor is at the level of 20-40mm. Pie only to the septum.
                      3. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 15: 27
                        +1
                        Quote: Krang
                        There the armor is at the level of 20-40mm. Pie only to the septum.

                        There armor level 40 +40 +20 uncounting air gaps.
                      4. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 15: 34
                        +3
                        _______________________
                  2. sedoj
                    sedoj 30 July 2013 19: 28
                    +2
                    In the photo, there’s some kind of Jeep - the spare tire is attached from the outside. :) lol
                2. Kars
                  Kars 30 July 2013 14: 40
                  +3
                  ________________________
            2. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 30 July 2013 18: 44
              +1
              Quote: Krang
              Yes, a continuous screen of homogeneous armor thickness according to various sources from 60mm, 65mm or 70mm. There is a possibility that 70mm is in the front, and 60mm in the MTO area. There is no pie there.

              Yes of course ....
              [img] https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-1nAY5ws9XLU/UffQGBfJFvI/AAAAAAAAACnE/VUID
              9P6QW1I/w427-h377-no/;l.JPG[/img]

              And if you look at the photo, it looks like two layers of tin with a foam between them. Somewhere there were photos of a bulwark pierced by fragments with roses from tin of the inner layer.
        2. Kars
          Kars 30 July 2013 14: 08
          +1
          ______________
    2. Rakti-kali
      Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 14: 36
      +5
      Quote: Krang
      Spaced armor in a larger total thickness than the T-90

      Oh, these tales ... oh, these storytellers ... Spaced armor, you know ... In general, the M1A2 has a rolled side 30 mm + bulwark 65 mm. For the old caliber camcorder BB this can be an obstacle, for BOPS not, well, only if at very small heading angles. What is better than the T-90 side armor protection?
      1. Crang
        Crang 30 July 2013 15: 17
        0
        Forgot about the 25,4mm pad.
  • Setrac
    Setrac 30 July 2013 12: 31
    +3
    Quote: Krang
    The Abrams is better protected from the side.

    Abrams - a classic self-propelled gun, with a thick forehead and weak sides and stern.
    1. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 30 July 2013 13: 25
      +4
      Self-propelled gun is still better - it has a higher elevation angle.
    2. svp67
      svp67 30 July 2013 20: 26
      +1
      Quote: Setrac
      Abrams - a classic self-propelled gun, with a thick forehead and weak sides and stern.
      This is called differential booking and it applies to all tanks ...
  • svp67
    svp67 30 July 2013 13: 06
    +2
    Quote: Krang
    The Abrams is better protected from the side.

    Haha ...
    You will also say that the "upper frontal part" is impenetrable .... repeat
    1. Kars
      Kars 30 July 2013 13: 16
      +4
      Quote: svp67
      You will also say that the "upper frontal part" is impenetrable.

      And were there reliable penetrations of VLD Abrams?
      1. Crang
        Crang 30 July 2013 15: 36
        0
        WLD or NLD? If VLD - well, probably ... From the roof of the "Faustpatron".
      2. svp67
        svp67 30 July 2013 18: 41
        +3
        Quote: Kars
        And were there reliable penetrations of VLD Abrams?

        What will remain of the Abrams in this case will generally be difficult to identify, the US simply does not fight with those who can reliably show it to them, with the help of an attack aircraft cannon, an artillery projectile such as our Kitolov or Daredevil, or PTS with a shock core ...
        The reservation scheme shown so long ago
        1. Kars
          Kars 30 July 2013 18: 45
          +2
          Quote: svp67
          What remains of "Abrams" in this case is generally difficult to identify

          So it wasn’t?
          1. Kars
            Kars 30 July 2013 19: 04
            +2
            Quote: svp67
            with the help of an attack aircraft cannon, an artillery projectile such as our "Kitolov" or "Brave" or a PTS with a shock core.

            Well, the whole roof is not enough, it is necessary to break through the VLD from the top.
            1. svp67
              svp67 30 July 2013 19: 15
              +2
              Quote: Kars
              Well, the whole roof is not enough, it is necessary to break through the VLD from the top.
              Do you have doubts about this probability?
              1. Kars
                Kars 30 July 2013 19: 26
                +1
                Quote: svp67
                Do you have doubts about this probability?

                yes. Especially with self-aiming warheads. Yes, and where is the illumination better to direct? And the tower is a bolder target.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 30 July 2013 19: 33
                  +1
                  Quote: Kars
                  yes. Especially with self-aiming warheads. Yes, and where is the illumination better to direct? And the tower is a bolder target.
                  Yes Who can argue, but there is also such a thing as "deviation" ...
                  We at one time experimented with "tilted cumulative warheads" until they realized that "UYa" is much more promising. I really hope that now they will get down to business and such shells will very soon appear in service, and with their appearance the Abrams can be safely written off ..
                  1. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 19: 46
                    +2
                    Quote: svp67
                    Yes Who can argue, but there is also such a thing as "deviation" ...

                    There is what?
                    Quote: svp67
                    that "UYa" is much more promising.

                    I personally do not see anything promising in it.
                    Quote: svp67
                    and with their appearance, "Abrams" can be safely written off

                    Do you want to say that our roof is better protected? And the Americans are so dumb that DZ on the roof can’t be put up? Will he not beat the infantry at least to beat?
                  2. svp67
                    svp67 30 July 2013 19: 50
                    +1
                    Quote: Kars
                    There is what?
                    And that can deviate towards WBD. And do you think she can stand it?

                    Quote: Kars
                    And the Americans are so stupid that DZ on the roof can not be put up?

                    They can. But I wonder how they will do it on VLD? Well, only if the fur-water set the TV ...
                  3. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 20: 08
                    +2
                    Quote: svp67
                    And that can deviate towards WBD. And do you think she can stand it?

                    If you deviate it is better already in the VLD than in the engine.
                    Quote: svp67
                    They can. But I wonder how they will do it on VLD? Well, only if the fur-water set the TV ..

                    I will do as ours with contact 1.
                  4. svp67
                    svp67 30 July 2013 20: 24
                    +1
                    Quote: Kars
                    I will do as ours with contact 1.
                    There, any option deprives the visibility mechanics ...
                  5. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 20: 35
                    +1
                    Why not? They don’t put a couple of tiles in front of the viewing devices. Anyway, there is a weakened zone in any case.
                  6. svp67
                    svp67 30 July 2013 21: 02
                    +1
                    Quote: Kars
                    Do not lay a pair of tiles in front of the viewing instruments.

                    A very large angle of inclination (reverse side "+") there, any object will reduce visibility ..
                  7. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 21: 14
                    +2
                    Quote: svp67
                    A very large angle of inclination (reverse side "+") there, any object will reduce visibility ..

                    I took a model, Abrams. I didn’t put a couple of tiles - about 40 centimeters from the hatch. And everything will be fine. Maybe the dead zone in front of the tank may slightly increase. But not critically.
                  8. svp67
                    svp67 30 July 2013 21: 18
                    +1
                    Quote: Kars
                    You can’t put a couple of tiles - about 40 centimeters from the hatch. And everything will be fine. Maybe the dead zone in front of the tank may be slightly increased. But not critical.
                    To understand this modelka is not enough, you need to sit in place of the mech-water and lead the tank over rough terrain ...
                  9. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 21: 33
                    +1
                    Quote: svp67
                    To understand this modelka is not enough, you need to sit in place of the mech-water and lead the tank over rough terrain ..

                    Well, you weren’t there like me. And you probably don’t have a model either?
                    Therefore, you cannot categorically declare impossibility.
  • PLO
    PLO 30 July 2013 14: 38
    +4
    The Abrams is better protected from the side.

    just the opposite
    from sides Abrams is protected worse than T-72/90
  • kavkaz8888
    kavkaz8888 30 July 2013 15: 17
    +2
    Do not respect the sides and back of the enemy
  • Corsair
    Corsair 30 July 2013 15: 23
    +2
    Quote: Krang
    The Abrams is better protected from the side.

    This image has already been laid out in one of the sections of the site, but I will take the liberty of repeating myself.
    Clickable Image:
    1. Kars
      Kars 30 July 2013 15: 26
      +3
      Quote: Corsair
      already laid out this picture

      Change to T-90 or Leopard will be the same
      1. svp67
        svp67 30 July 2013 18: 49
        +3
        Quote: Kars
        Change to T-90 or Leopard will be the same

        As well as on "Oplot", there is still a "curbstone" of the sight you can draw ...
        1. Kars
          Kars 30 July 2013 19: 07
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          As well as on "Oplot", there is still a "curbstone" of the sight you can draw ...

          But the stronghold will make a huge difference. The entire side profile can be excluded. And the side of the tower, too.

          as for the curbstone - in the picture of Abrash it’s also old without a panama, and the curbstones will be about the same.
          1. svp67
            svp67 30 July 2013 19: 18
            +4
            Quote: Kars
            But the stronghold will make a huge difference. The entire side profile can be excluded. And the side of the tower, too.

            Yes, what are you saying ...

            And under the "curbstone" is not the tower sticking out? And honestly, until your specialists show or any real clash that this skirt saves you from tandem ammunition, you can't believe a word like that.
            In Chechnya, the "beards" managed to plant 2 to 3 RPG grenades in the same place in the tank ...
            1. Kars
              Kars 30 July 2013 19: 30
              +1
              Quote: svp67
              And under the "curbstone" this is not a tower sticking out

              What are you talking about?
              Quote: svp67
              In Chechnya, the "beards" managed to plant 2 to 3 RPG grenades in the same place in the tank ...

              what they were given so to shoot? poor visibility? Open ZPU?
              Quote: svp67
              that this skirt saves from tandem ammunition, I don’t have to believe in a word like that.

              A skirt is what covers the lower part. There are skating rinks and almost no side.
              1. svp67
                svp67 30 July 2013 21: 05
                +2
                Quote: Kars
                What are you talking about?

                And you have not seen ... wink
                Quote: Kars
                what they were given so to shoot? poor visibility? Open ZPU?

                Lack of interaction with infantry - ZPU will not save here ...
                Quote: Kars
                A skirt is what covers the lower part. There are skating rinks and almost no side.

                A pair of hits in one place will make a hole through which an RPG grenade will pass ...
                1. Kars
                  Kars 30 July 2013 21: 18
                  +1
                  Quote: svp67
                  And you have not seen

                  What?
                  Quote: svp67
                  And the "Leopard" has something to do with it? Are you already purchasing it?

                  And what under the pedestal there is a tower clearly visible?

                  Quote: svp67
                  lack of interaction with the infantry - ZPU will not save here ...

                  And this is without KAZ? Or because of the DZ? and may not save, but better with her than without her.
                  Quote: svp67
                  A pair of hits in one place will make a hole through which an RPG grenade will pass.

                  I’m not sure - would you rather be without it? So that no one would have to suffer, fall into one place on a moving target? I have never noticed suicidal tendencies in you.
            2. Kars
              Kars 30 July 2013 19: 31
              +1
              Quote: svp67
              And under the "curbstone" is not the tower sticking out?
              1. svp67
                svp67 30 July 2013 21: 07
                +1
                And the "Leopard" has something to do with it? Are you already purchasing it?
          2. svp67
            svp67 30 July 2013 19: 24
            +4
            That would be on the march or in battle, not to lose this "skirt" you have to try very hard
            1. Kars
              Kars 30 July 2013 19: 47
              +1
              Quote: svp67
              That would be on the march or in battle, not to lose this "skirt" you have to try very hard

              she is well attached. And they will try for their own survival.
              1. svp67
                svp67 30 July 2013 21: 08
                +5
                Quote: Kars
                she is well attached.
                Not stronger than the walls of the house or 15-20 cm adult tree trunk
                1. Kars
                  Kars 30 July 2013 21: 19
                  +1
                  Quote: svp67
                  e is stronger than the walls of the house or 15-20 cm of the trunk of an adult tree
                  Can’t you go around?
                  1. svp67
                    svp67 30 July 2013 21: 20
                    0
                    Quote: Kars
                    Can’t you go around?
                    In most cases - of course you can, but why MOT does not work ... request
                  2. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 21: 34
                    +1
                    Quote: svp67
                    In most cases - of course you can, but why MOT does not work.

                    They must try. For tankers they’re trying. And then they cry that their RPG-7 is hot.
          3. Rakti-kali
            Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 20: 23
            +6
            Exactly. This beauty is up to the first more or less solid obstacle, and then a thousand and a half horses will rip off all this beauty. Yes, and the size of the taranta ... like the classic ... "during the journey the dog managed to grow a little bit ..."
  • rolik
    rolik 31 July 2013 11: 24
    +2
    Quote: Krang
    The Abrams is better protected from the side.

    I don’t want to prove and give facts, where the Abrash tower was broken from a heavy machine gun.
    Even in the film "Storming the White House" it is beautifully shown how this creation of military engineering is being destroyed into parts from RPG7)))))))
    1. Kars
      Kars 31 July 2013 14: 04
      +2
      Quote: rolik
      I don’t want to prove and bring facts, where a tower was broken from a heavy machine gun

      But this never happened. There was a defeat handed down by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Not integrated into the armor protection.
  • smart ass
    smart ass 30 July 2013 08: 45
    0
    Ahaha Chinese tanks !!!))))
  • anip
    anip 30 July 2013 07: 35
    +4
    I wonder who minus the article, agent of the State Department?
    1. Crang
      Crang 30 July 2013 07: 58
      0
      Ukrainians. Kars and his friends.
      1. Kars
        Kars 30 July 2013 08: 53
        +1
        Quote: Krang
        Kars and his friends.

        Cool you showed your paranoia))) why minus the article if it is, in principle, mediocre. Although the thesis
        I liked the third world
        India (the largest buyer), Algeria, Turkmenistan, Uganda and other developing countries or third world countries.
        1. Kars
          Kars 30 July 2013 09: 31
          +2
          And by the way, what kind of other countries is that?

          Flag of Russia.svg Russia - more than 500 T-90 of all modifications (of which about 200 units are in storage), as of 2012 [64].
          Flag of Azerbaijan.svg Azerbaijan - in 2011, an agreement was signed between the Ministry of Defense of Azerbaijan and Rosoboronexport on the purchase of 94 T-90S (3 battalions). The supply of tanks was launched in the spring of 2013. There is also an option for another 94 T-90S tanks [65]. At the request of the Azerbaijani side, the systems of optoelectronic suppression "Shtora-1" [62] [63] were installed on the tanks.
          Flag of India.svg India - about 700 T-90S / SA (Russian-made tanks and tank kits assembled at the HVF Indian state-owned enterprise), as of 2012 [66] [67]
          Flag of Algeria.svg Algeria - 185 T-90CA, as of 2012 [68]. The supply contract was concluded in 2006 in the amount of $ 1,0 billion. In total, 300 T-90CA tanks should be delivered [69].
          Flag of Turkmenistan.svg Turkmenistan - 10 T-90CA, as of 2011 [70] [71]. In the summer of 2011, a contract was signed for the supply of another 30 tanks. [72]
          Flag of Uganda.svg Uganda - 44 T-90CA, as of 2011. The tanks were delivered in 2011 as part of a package contract signed in 2010. [71] [73] [74]


          Maybe you need to hang up the price here as with the T-80?
          1. Seraph
            Seraph 30 July 2013 11: 50
            +8
            At the end of the 1920th century, the name Ukraine began to be used in an ethnic meaning and gradually replaced the church and official terms Little Russia, Little Russia. This is associated with the emergence of the Ukrainian national movement and its purposeful struggle against the Little Russian identity. The final consolidation of the term Ukraine is associated with the Bolshevik policy of indigenousization and Ukrainianization in the XNUMXs.
            This is also from Wikipedia. And now tell me that Ukraine and Ukrainians are not a product of the Bolsheviks!
          2. Black Colonel
            Black Colonel 30 July 2013 13: 27
            +1
            Carthage, Mesopotamia, Atlantis ... Yes, there are a lot of all there.
        2. anip
          anip 30 July 2013 09: 40
          +5
          Quote: Kars
          thesis
          I liked the third world
          India (the largest buyer), Algeria, Turkmenistan, Uganda and other developing countries or third world countries.

          And what is wrong with this thesis? Ukraine, it seems, also does not sell its tanks in the USA or Germany, maybe it would like to, but they don’t take it, they also have their own good tanks. And indeed, all developed countries have their own tanks, why buy strangers? So they sell to where they themselves can’t do it.
          1. Kars
            Kars 30 July 2013 09: 58
            +2
            Quote: anip
            Ukraine, it seems, also does not sell its tanks in the USA or Germany

            In the USA it actually sells. In principle. Well, and what do you remember where you are from Ukraine? Yes, even in comparison with the T-90
            Quote: anip
            And indeed, all developed countries have their own tanks, why buy someone else's

            The pool of countries with a full tank production cycle is not so large and not all developed countries and countries of the second world have it - if there is a third world, then somewhere else
  • slaventi
    slaventi 30 July 2013 07: 47
    13
    The information war against the Russian military-industrial complex, specifically against the t-90, is being waged not only with the help of the media, but also with the help of corrupt and helpful officials, like the former chief of the general staff Makarov, who publicly criticized the tank in the press.
    1. lewerlin53rus
      lewerlin53rus 30 July 2013 08: 02
      13
      Criticism, of course, is also a necessary thing. But only if it is aimed at identifying real shortcomings in order to eliminate them. But when criticism and indiscriminate bawling are divorced, it is immediately obvious that this is an order, aimed not so much to lower the fighting qualities of our tank, as the main competitor to NATO products, but to be directed against the prestige of Russia as a whole and its army and industry in particular.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 30 July 2013 09: 46
        10
        Quote: lewerlin53rus
        as the main competitor of NATO products,

        Not NATO, Ukrainian. And legs grow from there
        1. Kars
          Kars 30 July 2013 10: 02
          +4
          Quote: Spade
          Not NATO, Ukrainian. And legs grow from there

          Do not forget the Chinese, and second-hand Germans
        2. svp67
          svp67 30 July 2013 13: 22
          +3
          Quote: Spade
          Not NATO, Ukrainian. And legs grow from there

          Yes, and NATO, too, in tenders, she also participates ...
    2. shasherin_pavel
      shasherin_pavel 2 August 2013 07: 43
      0
      So it was in the 39th, when Kulik stopped the entry of the T-34 into the army, indicating its shortcomings. It seems in the 43rd he was shot.
  • pinecone
    pinecone 30 July 2013 07: 55
    +5
    Another nonsense spread by hostile media in the framework of a total psychological warfare. In the absence of counter-propaganda, it often works, which is not surprising.
    1. Crang
      Crang 30 July 2013 07: 58
      0
      You can’t be fooled. We know which is better.
      1. Kars
        Kars 30 July 2013 08: 55
        +2
        Quote: Krang
        We know which is better.

        And they could have been even better. With some luck, even with a 152 mm gun. But.
        1. svp67
          svp67 30 July 2013 13: 24
          +6
          Quote: Kars
          With some luck, even with an 152 mm gun. But.

          But do not run ahead of the cart ... this option is just waiting in the wings, while there is the opportunity to experiment with 125mm ... and most importantly to sell.
          1. Kars
            Kars 30 July 2013 13: 31
            +3
            Quote: svp67
            don't run in front of the cart

            Treading on the spot for 20 years.
            Quote: svp67
            ..this option is just waiting in the wings

            Of course he waits. If he was not handed over for scrap.
            Quote: svp67
            from 125mm to experiment ... and most importantly sell.

            And I thought the main defense capability of the Russian Federation. And you are just like the military-industrial complex of Ukraine))
            1. svp67
              svp67 31 July 2013 01: 39
              +4
              Quote: Kars
              Treading on the spot for 20 years.

              Times were not very good ...
              Quote: Kars
              And I thought the main defense capability of the Russian Federation. And you are just like the military-industrial complex of Ukraine))

              Russia's defense capability suffers more from the lack of new 125 mm BOPS than from the transition to the 152mm caliber
    2. KazaK Bo
      KazaK Bo 30 July 2013 20: 34
      +1
      Quote: pinecone
      In the absence of counter-propaganda, it often works, which is not surprising.

      Sorry, but you would not specify ... when and where it works, who it affects:
      - professionals who purchase armored vehicles? I doubt it ... they use other sources of information ...
      - military ... the same is hard to believe ... this category, serving this technique, hardly reads articles from this source ... and they know this technique not by hearsay ... and not by these sources ...
      - the townsfolk ... and even more so they do not read such publications ...
      And if a specialist picks up such a printed source of information, then perhaps in order to make a boat for his little son ...
      But about the counter-propaganda ... You are absolutely right ... even if not in this case ...
  • TRex
    TRex 30 July 2013 07: 59
    25
    I don't know - "War informant" or "Military provocateur"... do not read. Of particular concern is the insecurity of the T-90 tank in the event of a direct hit by a nuclear weapon. He is also simply powerless in countering the probable enemy’s submarines. Cheap, in short ..
  • Revolver
    Revolver 30 July 2013 08: 11
    18
    T-34s were cheap too, especially next to the Panther. But they reached Berlin. Largely because the T-34 was so cheap to manufacture, yet more than adequate on the battlefield, the Discovery Channel named it the best tank of all time.
    1. JIaIIoTb
      JIaIIoTb 30 July 2013 09: 37
      14
      When I meet 1 expensive tank with 3 less expensive, I will put on inexpensive tanks)))
      The Great Patriotic War is an example of this.
      Sincerely.
      1. Kars
        Kars 30 July 2013 10: 03
        +1
        Quote: JIaIIoTb
        But they reached Berlin

        But at the same time, one should not forget that 95 of his brothers remained on the road (not only the T-000, of course)
        1. Seraph
          Seraph 30 July 2013 11: 55
          +8
          We now reach Berlin, if that. But it is not known where the Ukrainian army will get, or rather, what it will reach.
          1. Kars
            Kars 30 July 2013 11: 58
            +1
            I’m watching you go nuts.

            we don’t have to go anywhere. We don’t suffer from great imperial ambitions. And no one doubts that people can be put into graves.
            1. svp67
              svp67 30 July 2013 13: 25
              +8
              Quote: Kars
              And no one doubts that people can be put into graves.
              Duck, however, and in your abilities, in this field ... also no doubt
            2. Ulan
              Ulan 30 July 2013 17: 51
              +6
              Achieve something in life or history only the one who "suffers from ambition." Otherwise, man would not have invented an airplane, a wheel, etc.
              I think that Ukraine has not lagged behind in terms of "laying in graves" either.
              But actually an article about tanks, let's not get into a hassle.
              1. Kars
                Kars 30 July 2013 18: 16
                +1
                Quote: Ulan
                Achieve something in life or history only the one who "suffers from ambition."

                Ambition ambition.
                Quote: Ulan
                I think that Ukraine has not lagged behind in terms of "laying in graves" either.

                Compared to the Russian Federation since 1991? And no one is going to Berlin, like London or Sofia.
            3. shasherin_pavel
              shasherin_pavel 2 August 2013 08: 05
              +2
              To honor you, so not a single Ukrainian was in Berlin! And not a single GSS from Ukraine was presented ... It was our victory. The victory of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, which included Ukraine. Stalin made sure that the representatives of Ukraine and Belarus sat in the UN as representatives of the victorious countries of fascism, and now the ugly son ... Taras Bulba disowned the glory of his ancestors. Remember the words of Taras to your son ...
              1. Kars
                Kars 2 August 2013 09: 08
                +1
                Quote: shasherin_pavel
                To honor you, so not a single Ukrainian was in Berlin!

                And you read carefully. This is not about 1945, but about the future campaign against Berlin.
          2. kavkaz8888
            kavkaz8888 30 July 2013 15: 31
            15
            When two tigers fight, the jackal celebrates victory, which he observes from a safe hill.
            I’ve already got this picture here today
            laid out. But the repetition of the mother of learning
            1. Ulan
              Ulan 30 July 2013 17: 51
              +2
              That's exactly what I am talking about.
        2. Setrac
          Setrac 30 July 2013 12: 37
          11
          Quote: Kars
          But at the same time, one should not forget that 95 of his brothers remained on the road (not only the T-000, of course)

          You will have to cut back the sturgeon, otherwise it turns out that by the end of the war, ALL T-34s produced, including those produced after the war, were destroyed.
          1. Kars
            Kars 30 July 2013 12: 52
            +2
            Quote: Setrac
            Sturgeon will have to be cut

            Quote: Kars
            not only T-43 naturally

            True wrong T-34
        3. Flooding
          Flooding 30 July 2013 17: 15
          +6
          Quote: Kars
          But at the same time, one should not forget that 95 of his brothers remained on the road (not only the T-000, of course)

          Of these, more than 33 thousand light tanks (T-26, BT-7, etc.)
          1. Kars
            Kars 30 July 2013 17: 35
            +1
            Quote: Flood
            Of these, more than 33 thousand light tanks (T-26, BT-7, etc.)

            and what? did the Germans also have a lot of light tanks? or maybe light tanks are not counted?
            1. JIaIIoTb
              JIaIIoTb 30 July 2013 18: 04
              +7
              Dear Kars. The main thing We have reached and destroyed the enemy almost completely, despite the more (as you try to convey to us) perfect (i.e. expensive) equipment from the enemy.
              Sincerely.
              1. Kars
                Kars 30 July 2013 18: 19
                +1
                Quote: JIaIIoTb
                The main thing: We reached and destroyed the enemy almost completely

                They got it, destroyed it. But before that, they rolled back to the Volga and Moscow. They left millions of people under occupation.
                Quote: JIaIIoTb
                in spite of more (as you try to convey to us) perfect (i.e. expensive) equipment from the enemy.

                You could not understand what I'm trying to convey.

                And those who went to Berlin have not yet been buried all humanly.
                1. Rakti-kali
                  Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 19: 08
                  +9
                  Quote: Kars
                  And those who went to Berlin have not yet been buried all humanly.

                  Yes, for some of them are alive.
                  Quote: Kars
                  They got it, destroyed it. But before that, they rolled back to the Volga and Moscow. They left millions of people under occupation.

                  Undoubtedly because of the cheapness of the tanks ... Maybe you don’t need to think about wet when discussing green.
                  1. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 19: 32
                    +1
                    Quote: Rakti-Kali
                    Yes, for some of them are alive

                    And the bones of some are excavated during spring-field work of the tractor, and yes, black archaeologists.
                    Quote: Rakti-Kali
                    Undoubtedly due to the cheapness of tanks ...

                    And because of the tanks, too.
                    1. Albert1988
                      Albert1988 30 July 2013 22: 21
                      +1
                      Quote: Kars
                      And the bones of some are excavated during spring-field work of the tractor, and yes, black archaeologists.
                      Well, here we have to prove in many ways that these are bones of ours, and not of the Fritz, for example ...
                      1. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 23: 05
                        +1
                        Quote: Albert1988
                        Well, here we have to prove in many ways that these are bones of ours, and not of the Fritz, for example ..

                        And the Fritzes. And ours. Everything is there. But the land is ours. And the evidence is the sea. Especially on May 9, they are re-buried.
                        Quote: Albert1988
                        I think you will not deny that we rolled back not because the T-34 was worse than German cars?

                        Including the T-34 - you should not consider it a masterpiece in 1941-42. Everyone remembered the winning spurt of the T-34-85.
                        Quote: Albert1988
                        When he went to the troops, we just went on the offensive

                        Yes, that's not really. There are a lot of factors.
                      2. aleshka
                        aleshka 31 July 2013 06: 22
                        0
                        t-z4-85 is already essentially a different tank!
              2. Albert1988
                Albert1988 30 July 2013 22: 20
                +3
                Quote: Kars
                But before that, they rolled back to the Volga and Moscow. Millions of people were left under occupation.
                I think you will not deny that we rolled back not because the T-34 was worse than German cars? When he went into the troops, we just went on the offensive.
              3. phantom359
                phantom359 30 July 2013 23: 22
                +2
                Old man, German videos burned no less. The main losses are T2, t3, t4.
                1. shasherin_pavel
                  shasherin_pavel 2 August 2013 08: 22
                  +3
                  And the trophies, which the Germans do not like to remember, and thus lower the number of lost armored units. Manstein writes in his memoirs that in the Crimea, there were no GERMAN tanks at all. but the commander of the Wehrmacht anti-tank gun writes that 40 new French tanks drove past them, and the tankers in their neat uniform looked at the artillerymen with contempt, but 40 tanks passed, and not a single one came back, the German himself writes: "Tips for in one battle, they knocked out all forty vehicles and captured the battlefield, so that all the vehicles remained on that front line. " In the book "Tigers in battle" there is a document that the T-6N No. 3 is undergoing long-term repairs, and it was this machine that was demonstrated in Gorky Park. And we can also say that all German tanks converted into self-propelled guns, and which were in K.A. remained in the ranks! Then we must remember the T-34 tanks that the Germans used in the Battle of Kursk.
          2. Flooding
            Flooding 30 July 2013 18: 09
            +3
            Quote: Kars
            and what? did the Germans also have a lot of light tanks? or maybe light tanks are not counted?

            Clarification to your submission of information. No more
            1. Kars
              Kars 30 July 2013 18: 20
              +1
              Quote: Flood
              Clarification to your submission of information. No more

              vryatli it needed to be clarified. otherwise it is possible to add to the losses of the armored vehicles of the Allies, they also pulled the Wehrmacht tanks towards themselves somehow.
              1. Flooding
                Flooding 30 July 2013 18: 32
                +5
                Quote: Kars
                vryatli it needed to be clarified. otherwise it is possible to add to the losses of the armored vehicles of the Allies, they also pulled the Wehrmacht tanks towards themselves somehow.

                Great thought, by the way. Indeed, the losses of Lend-Lease tanks also fit into these figures. There is reason to think about their quality ...
          3. family tree
            family tree 30 July 2013 22: 46
            +3
            Quote: Kars
            and what? did the Germans also have a lot of light tanks? or maybe light tanks are not counted?

            Then we consider Ganomagi and other bronchivichki.
            1. Kars
              Kars 30 July 2013 23: 08
              +1
              Quote: perepilka
              Then we consider Ganomagi and other bronchivka

              There is an article where I co-authored a bit.

              http://topwar.ru/25238-skolko-tankov-bylo-u-gitlera-otkroveniya-viktora-suvorova
              .html
              1. family tree
                family tree 31 July 2013 20: 05
                +4
                Quote: Kars
                There is an article where I co-authored a bit.

                There is such a saying, the Falcon is visible about the flight, and the good fellow for the snot laughing Kars, I respect you anyway. By MTO and hodovke, clash like something? Well, a suitcase against B2? No, well, it will be cognitively laughing
                1. Kars
                  Kars 31 July 2013 20: 31
                  +2
                  Quote: perepilka
                  , I already respect you.

                  thanks for that.

                  Quote: perepilka
                  By MTO and hodovke, clash like something? Well, a suitcase against B2? No, well, it will be cognitively

                  Unless to me, I never really delved into this topic. The main thing is traveling. Horse forces, transmission losses.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. shasherin_pavel
        shasherin_pavel 2 August 2013 07: 57
        +1
        Well, where did such numbers come from? At the end of the Battle of Stalingrad, more than 700 Soviet tanks abandoned in the initial phase of the battle were returned to service. These tanks are also included in this regard. Factory inspections of wrecked tanks returned to the factory for repair say that on average, up to 34 direct hits are required, except for rebounds, to completely disable the T-6 tank (for major repairs). And before re-melting, the tank could go through up to three overhauls. If each repair is considered destruction, then each return of the tank to the system is considered as a new car.
        1. Kars
          Kars 2 August 2013 09: 11
          +1
          Quote: shasherin_pavel
          Well, where did such numbers come from?

          The official report of the Ministry of Defense of the USSR
          Quote: shasherin_pavel
          At the end of the Battle of Stalingrad, more than 700 Soviet tanks abandoned in the initial phase of the battle were returned to service

          And where are your numbers?
          Quote: shasherin_pavel
          before remelting, the tank could go through up to three overhauls

          96 are official irretrievable losses. Those killed may very well have reached 000-250 thousand (inclusive)
  • DmitriRazumov
    DmitriRazumov 30 July 2013 16: 27
    +8
    Quote: Nagan
    T-34s were also cheap, especially next to the Panther.

    "Cheap" should probably be put in quotation marks. The T-34 was indeed cheaper to manufacture and operate, but this does not mean that it was inferior to the PanzerKampfWagen-5 (Panter) on the battlefield. Without going into details (armor thickness, gun caliber, etc.), we can say that the T-shka was much more maneuverable, maintainable, reliable, easy to control, and with a skilful crew left no chance for monsters like Panter. In Kubinka (Moscow region), in the GABTU Museum, this is clearly visible with the naked eye. In 43, on the Kursk Bulge, most of the Panter did not even reach positions due to various kinds of malfunctions. The two-wheel overlapping row of the Panter chassis does not leave it any chance of use in winter conditions and especially in late autumn, because dirt, freezing in narrow gaps, simply immobilizes the monster and makes it a good target. In order to repair the engine from the Panter, it is necessary to remove the turret and disassemble 70% of the structures, which is not possible in the field, so the Germans had to send almost all damaged tanks to factories by rail, and this dramatically reduced the combat readiness of PanzerWaffe parts. Separately, we can say about the gasoline engine of German tanks. cannot be compared with Soviet diesels. The gasoline unit was flammable, expensive to manufacture and operate, and less reliable.
    I think it would be nice to consider the same parameters for the T-90S and its western competitors. Events in Syria have shown, for example, that the old, simple and reliable 72s successfully operate against militants armed with the most modern anti-tank weapons. The internet is full of information about Abrams damage from the simplest RPGs in Iraq, etc. So what is better and where is the big question.
    1. alone
      alone 30 July 2013 21: 38
      0
      t-34 was undoubtedly the best tank of the second world. By the way, even the Wehrmacht generals talked about this
      1. Kars
        Kars 30 July 2013 21: 47
        +1
        Quote: lonely
        By the way, even the Wehrmacht generals talked about this

        they had to come up with an excuse for their defeat.
        therefore, they do not make sense.
        1. family tree
          family tree 30 July 2013 22: 55
          +5
          Quote: Kars
          they had to come up with an excuse for their defeat.
          therefore, they do not make sense.

          I’ll be kidding me all the time, until the laughter that in the 41st, when the T-34s were superior to their tanks in armor and weapons, ours retreated, and in the 43rd, like a cat and a 4-arm, there was a bigger arm, but quite the contrary general concept.
          1. maxvet
            maxvet 31 July 2013 11: 39
            +1
            it’s not only the tanks, the structure of the army, the supply, the condition and the possibility of industry and agricultural
        2. maxvet
          maxvet 31 July 2013 11: 37
          0
          or in Soviet captivity
    2. shasherin_pavel
      shasherin_pavel 2 August 2013 08: 31
      +2
      I assembled the Gonomag model here and remembered its operation: After 250 km of the Gonomag run, the crew must consolidate more than 100 points by car. Even the Germans write that the Tiger needs 1.5 hours to repair for one hour of run. Two days ride three days repair.
  • shasherin_pavel
    shasherin_pavel 2 August 2013 07: 47
    0
    T-34 in 44g. It was cheaper than in the 39th. despite the strengthening of weapons and armor. But it was made from the plant for 500 km, but after the war, all tanks were returned to the factory and increased its mileage by 2000 km.
  • buzuke
    buzuke 30 July 2013 08: 11
    +5
    they declare the T-90S main tank “cheap,” but they immediately define this term. The reason for using this word is called the lowest cost among the rest of the technology of this class, presented on the market

    yeah, as in a joke - Petrov do not do ... to? Sorry would like to emphasize not a high cost - would write inexpensive, well, or at the extreme cheap. but everyone’s cheap stuff is associated with bad quality. but in general we’re to blame ourselves, we’re not modifying the information field
    1. es.d
      es.d 30 July 2013 16: 46
      +2
      Quote: buzuke
      but everyone’s cheap stuff is associated with bad quality. but in general we’re to blame ourselves, we’re not modifying the information field

      The word "cheap", in the title of the article, a direct link to the tabloids ... "The deputy bit off a member of the migrant worker." Everything is like in the joke "..and not in billiards, but in a point, and did not win, but lost .."
  • deman73
    deman73 30 July 2013 08: 24
    +4
    Commercial and information wars have not yet been canceled
  • svskor80
    svskor80 30 July 2013 08: 39
    +6
    Even from the data inside the article, it’s clear that since the T-90 is the most successful MBT in sales, it means there is MASS serial production, and this, as you know, reduces the cost and makes the product even more competitive. Nobody can even see the more expensive foreign tanks and make them individually for exhibitions for many millions of dollars. Although of course it is clear that the figures of value are far-fetched.
    1. Humen
      Humen 30 July 2013 09: 20
      +2
      They just tried to arrange it so that all the pluses went negative and it was difficult to catch unprepared people.
  • sys-1985
    sys-1985 30 July 2013 08: 47
    +6
    There is nothing ideal and never will be, each nut has its own bolt - the question is time. At the moment, the ratio of all + and - in favor of T - 90. soldier
    1. King
      King 30 July 2013 09: 33
      +3
      I agree the price and quality on the side of the T-90.
  • ed65b
    ed65b 30 July 2013 09: 13
    +8
    I even know who told such an article - professor laughing
  • Grishka100watt
    Grishka100watt 30 July 2013 09: 36
    +6
    Experts have been named "Military informer" cheap.
  • Alekseev
    Alekseev 30 July 2013 09: 59
    +3
    There is no need to react to such "bullshit" articles ...
    A lot of honor for amateurs - defamators, who often saw the tank only in the picture.
    You can discuss specific shortcomings and advantages with knowledgeable people, but not with engaged talkers.
  • il-z
    il-z 30 July 2013 10: 02
    +2
    Anyone who calls this tank "cheap" just wants to become famous as the "pug that barked at the elephant." And in general, no one posted information that they bought such a tank to go, for example, for vegetables, fruits (I wanted to write with herbs, but somehow it turns out in two ways), or for trips to nature.
  • vitek1233
    vitek1233 30 July 2013 10: 07
    +2
    Russian tanks are some of the best in the world, but only a real battle can show how everything really is.
    1. Revolver
      Revolver 30 July 2013 18: 23
      0
      Quote: vitek1233
      Russian tanks are some of the best in the world, but only a real battle can show how everything really is.

      But still better we remain in the dark happy. So that it was not necessary to scrape the fighting compartment from what was left of the crew.
  • Kiliny
    Kiliny 30 July 2013 10: 10
    +2
    As in people, many have the same weakness:
    Everything seems to us to be another mistake;
    And you will take up the task yourself,
    So you're half as bad.
  • FunkschNNX
    FunkschNNX 30 July 2013 10: 13
    +4
    No matter what they write on the forums. It is the townsfolk who make up the opinion on publicly available information, and potential customers of the forums do not read, they are provided with test data and shelling of one degree or another of secrecy. So the opinion of the next Internet specialist never worries anyone.
  • Middle-brother
    Middle-brother 30 July 2013 10: 19
    +2
    Black PR is also PR. Can raise the price to shut up? laughing
  • silver_roman
    silver_roman 30 July 2013 10: 37
    +7
    Dear author, I can hardly believe that a real expert could say such nonsense, and if he could, then for a certain sum. selling anything at all is a business. selling MBT is a very profitable business. if our MBTs buy more than everyone else, then someone we crossed the road. hence this "someone" will try by any means to change the situation in their favor.
    I don’t believe that there are people on our portal who actually consider the t-90s project to be inadequate.
    The mere fact that the Syrian T-72s - which practically have not been modified (the Italian modification does not count) - very stubbornly resist various anti-tank complexes (of course not advanced, but the Abrams and RPG 7 burned with URA) already speaks volumes. Poor FSA "independence fighters" squeak in horror and ask the West for help with appropriate weapons.

    And the article deals with the T-90s, which is significantly superior to the "stock" T-72.

    By the way, in the second photo, the "curtains" are not visible. maybe ours gradually decided to abandon this complex ?? is there anyone knowledgeable on this issue ???
  • Seventh
    Seventh 30 July 2013 10: 47
    +5
    Since this is "cheap" and no one needs it, replace our entire outdated fleet with it. I think everyone will be happy.
  • shoroh
    shoroh 30 July 2013 10: 48
    +6
    And all at once they began to argue violently, upholding the obvious things. I was pleased that the Uralvagonzavod is ready to make tanks in the thousands. in conditions when production in Russia has sharply decreased, such figures are encouraging. five thousand of these machines are bent and China and Europe if necessary.
  • Prapor Afonya
    Prapor Afonya 30 July 2013 10: 58
    +3
    Quote: tronin.maxim
    Whatever information attacks on the t-90, it is the best! Many countries, buyers know this, for example, India, which conducted stringent tests for the tank! Let the enemies look or try our tank, and everyone can pour mud (although here it must be taken into account that they are paid money for this).

    And so it is always, the more afraid, the more dirt, they hope that we will not release this tank anymore! Let them hope!
    1. maxvet
      maxvet 30 July 2013 11: 13
      0
      But are we going to do it yourself? The T-90s are not going to buy MS, are they waiting for Armata?
      1. silver_roman
        silver_roman 30 July 2013 14: 28
        0
        Yes sir. MS is designed more for export. The Indians are also interested, but they have now adopted their MBT - Archzhun - 2 (or something like that - it's hard to pronounce). They drank it for a long time.
    2. silver_roman
      silver_roman 30 July 2013 14: 27
      +4
      By the way, at one time it was the presence of the t-90 in India on the border with China that cooled the hot heads of the Chinese. So the t-90 is essentially a strategic weapon in the right hands.
  • tilovaykrisa
    tilovaykrisa 30 July 2013 10: 59
    +7
    One will write nonsense for a dollar, and the rest will spread this foolishness around the world for free. Give constructive criticism !!! Bring us Merkava, Leopold, Abrams in Alabino, we ourselves will test drive a shoot, and then we will write honestly, we do not need to lie. And for heresy in court.
  • alone
    alone 30 July 2013 11: 10
    +2
    After reading the article, I was once again convinced that the Azerbaijani Ministry of Defense made the right decision by purchasing T-90s tanks from Russia. and what type of weaknesses are there, and which tank doesn’t have them? especially the earlier modifications participated in Chechen companies and were practically invulnerable. Example 1T-90A received seven hits from RPG-7 and remained in service
    1. Kars
      Kars 30 July 2013 11: 28
      +1
      Quote: lonely
      moreover, earlier modifications participated in Chechen companies and were practically invulnerable. Example 1T-90A received seven hits from RPG-7 and remained in service

      Where did you get that? In the UVZ museum there is one mention of a business trip to Chechnya. Where is it written about the military use?

      And by the way, the T-90A appeared in 2006.
    2. Rakti-kali
      Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 11: 40
      +3
      Quote: lonely
      moreover, earlier modifications participated in Chechen companies and were practically invulnerable

      Well, only if the T-72 is considered an early modification ... winked
      The T-90 was not used as a standard weapon for tank or motorized rifle units and formations in both campaigns on the territory of the Czech Republic, at least until the end of the active phase of the CTO.
      1. alone
        alone 30 July 2013 12: 34
        0
        in the raid of Basayev and Khattab in Dagestan, the episode of the T-90 kada of the first modification was mentioned, took the fight, received 7 hits and remained in service
        1. Kars
          Kars 30 July 2013 13: 15
          +2
          Quote: lonely
          d Cada t-90 of the first modification took the fight, gender

          The eyes of the stah are large, it was a T-72 but not a T-90
          1. alone
            alone 30 July 2013 13: 37
            -3
            the loss of t-72 according to official data of the Ministry of Defense is 273 pieces. many were destroyed in one hit.
            1. silver_roman
              silver_roman 30 July 2013 14: 32
              +1
              if I’m not mistaken, then there was even a case when 72 went into battle, hung with DZ, but due to some stupidity, this DZ had no charge inside. Those. in fact, the tank was hung with metal boxes. Then there were many losses, including then. I don’t know if this is true or not.
              1. yanus
                yanus 30 July 2013 20: 09
                +4
                Quote: silver_roman
                if I’m not mistaken, then there was even a case when 72 went into battle, hung with DZ, but due to some stupidity, this DZ had no charge inside. Those. in fact, the tank was hung with metal boxes. Then there were many losses, including then. I don’t know if this is true or not.

                True, there was also a stupid command in the first Chechen one. But in the second irreparable loss among tanks and a dozen will not be.
            2. Rakti-kali
              Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 15: 05
              +3
              Quote: lonely
              the loss of t-72 according to official data of the Ministry of Defense is 273 pieces. many were destroyed in one hit.

              And share the source of innermost knowledge.
              1. alone
                alone 30 July 2013 21: 40
                -1
                google it. there you will find about the losses of the Russian army in armored vehicles
                1. yanus
                  yanus 30 July 2013 22: 13
                  +1
                  Quote: lonely
                  google it. there you will find about the losses of the Russian army in armored vehicles

                  Google yourself. At the same time, you will be surprised to learn that armored vehicles are not only tanks, but armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles, and BMDs. By the way, there and T80 in a decent amount participated. So the super-T80 (well, advanced Ukrainians think so) were destroyed no worse than the "dull and obscene" T72.
                2. Rakti-kali
                  Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 22: 22
                  +4
                  Why should I google?
                  Irrecoverable losses on tanks for the period from 31.12.94/01.04.95/XNUMX - XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX. the city of Grozny.
                  74 guards MSBr - 4 T-72B (M)
                  131MSBR - 17 T-72A
                  81 guards MSP - 6 T-80
                  255 guards MSP - 1 T-72A
                  276 SMEs - 7 T-72B
                  324 SMEs - 4 T-72B
                  133 guards OTB - 12 T-80BV

                  06.08.96/12.08.96/5 - XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX, Grozny - XNUMX tanks.

                  Bottom line: 56 tanks lost forever.
                  Assume that the bearded somewhere else shot 217 of our tanks, you see, it's hard.
                  1. alone
                    alone 30 July 2013 22: 26
                    -4
                    Do you think for the period from 01.04.94 to 06.08.96 they sat by the fire and peacefully smoked a pipe of peace? and you don’t think 50 tanks of the Kantemir division, destroyed before the beginning of the Chechen Comran? are these tanks Papuan? I’ll give you accurate information if you are too lazy
                    1. Rakti-kali
                      Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 23: 24
                      +3
                      Quote: lonely
                      Do you think for the period from 01.04.94 to 06.08.96 they sat by the fire and peacefully smoked a pipe of peace?

                      No, Mlyn, they burned worthless tanks of stupid Russians ...
                      During the most difficult battles, we lost 56 tanks irretrievably. When would the bandits manage to fire another 217?
                      If you are so sure of the figure that you wrote - provide a list of losses, at least by connections, for the period not covered by my list.
                      Quote: lonely
                      and you don’t consider 50 tanks of the Kantemir division destroyed before the beginning of the Chechen Comran?

                      No, I don’t think so, because almost two dozen out of about 40 T-72s transferred to Avturkhanov subsequently fought against us.
                  2. alone
                    alone 30 July 2013 22: 45
                    -3
                    RBC, 10.09.2000/14/15, Moscow 31:XNUMX:XNUMX
                    In this Chechen campaign, the loss of tanks of federal forces is several tens of times less than in the past.
                    RBC. 10.09.2000/14/15, Moscow 31:9:200. Tank losses during the ongoing anti-terrorist operation in Chechnya are several tens of times less than in the last war, Colonel-General Sergei Maev, head of the Main Armored Directorate of the Russian Defense Ministry, told reporters today. - In this war, - S. Maev noted, - 200 tanks were lost in Chechnya, and about 100 vehicles in the past. He also stated that the annual natural loss of tanks is up to XNUMX vehicles. This year, deliveries of new tanks to the troops are not planned. About XNUMX will be purchased

                    and now, plus those tanks that were hit on 26.11.94 and those that are after fighting
                    actions were written off due to damage, i.e. were not repairable, it turns out that something like + 10 pieces
                    1. Rakti-kali
                      Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 23: 39
                      +3
                      Quote: lonely
                      RBC, 10.09.2000/14/15, Moscow 31:XNUMX:XNUMX

                      I am not interested in the erotic dreams of the magazine men.
                      Quote: lonely
                      - In this war, - S. Maev noted, - 9 tanks were lost in Chechnya, and about 200 vehicles in the past

                      That is, the sturgeon is cut from 273 to "about 200"?
                      Okay, I'll even simplify your task - I counted 56 irretrievably lost tanks in Grozny, to which we need to add another 11 T-80 (245 MRP) and T-72A (693 and 503 MRP), for a total of 67 irrevocable tanks. Provide information on the remaining "about" 133 tanks to get the desired "about" 200.
                      Quote: lonely
                      and now, plus those tanks lined here 26.11.94/XNUMX/XNUMX and those that after the fighting were decommissioned due to damage, i.e. were not repairable it turns out that something like that + -10 pieces

                      What the hell to do this ??? Those that were not repairable, I already considered irrevocable. And dozens of completely repairable tanks were written off, just because repairs were more expensive than re-conservation from storage.
                      1. alone
                        alone 31 July 2013 10: 35
                        -4
                        Colonel General Sergei Maev, head of the Main Armored Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation - he should provide information about the rest. the figure of 200 lost tanks flew out of his mouth. judging by the position of a fully competent military. I personally tend to trust him
                      2. Rakti-kali
                        Rakti-kali 31 July 2013 12: 20
                        +3
                        Quote: lonely
                        Colonel General Sergei Maev, head of the Main Armored Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation - he should provide information about the rest. the figure of 200 lost tanks flew out of his mouth. judging by the position of a fully competent military. I personally tend to trust him

                        Our "competent" are still not allowing themselves to blurt out - recently one of these gathered for the price of one T-90 as much as three "Leopards" to buy.
                        IMHO the definition "inadequate" describes such figures much better.
                      3. alone
                        alone 31 July 2013 14: 25
                        -3
                        you still accuse me of having appointed such "competent" to these high positions.)))))))) If Mayev is wrong, demand from him. I am an ordinary citizen and tend to believe him as the head of the Main Armored Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
  • eplewke
    eplewke 30 July 2013 11: 11
    +6
    What can we say about the T-90 ??? If India, for example, has two constraints in front of Pakistan: Nuclear weapons and 200 T-90S on the border with Pakistan. After India’s purchase of the T-90, Pakistan began peace talks. :) They are afraid of Russian technology. And in wartime, in the case of masturbating hostilities, famous Abrams and Merkavs with Goliaths, they can knock down unpretentious T-72b, I am silent about the T-90.
  • burhan
    burhan 30 July 2013 11: 34
    +3
    Hollywood and paid media are weapons and this must be taken into account.
    Though. enemy self-deception is also not bad in a direct collision. winked
  • Shadowcat
    Shadowcat 30 July 2013 11: 41
    +3
    If you want to defeat the enemy, undermine his faith in himself and his weapons.
  • vadson
    vadson 30 July 2013 11: 45
    +2
    most countries in the world still look in the mouth of the usa and others like them, against this background, the sale of our inexpensive and very reliable tanks in large numbers upsets the competitors. Hence the attacks on our VPK. Remember the contracts with Iraq and Iran
  • Gorchilin
    Gorchilin 30 July 2013 12: 20
    16 th
    Stop promoting this old trough!

    "It is noted that the T-90 is the main threat to the armored forces of NATO" - nonsense. When in the 70s / 80s the Soviet tank forces gained a qualitative advantage, this led to a flurry of new developments. New tanks, ATGM, anti-tank weapons - NATO was rapidly closing the gap.

    Today, there is not much hype.

    The T-90 itself is only an attempt to initially bring the T-72 to at least the level of T-64B. Moreover, the basis was not the best Soviet T-80 tank, but the most clumsy one.

    The tank has preserved many archaic structural elements, which, foolishly sincerely constructors have been replicating for decades.

    Not so long ago, the news was- Nizhny Tagil abandons its chassis. She begins to do the type of T-80. Still, the engine would be delivered from there with the MZ - the price would not have been for the car.

    It was this particular tank that was the reason for the showdown at the highest level, it was precisely at its expense that the question of the "coefficient of technical novelty" was raised. The car is OLD. Issued as a new one. Moreover, at the expense of cheap stuff, it's not true, it was precisely about him that Postnikov declared "I don't need a tank for 118 million." It is half or two times cheaper for foreigners than for their own.

    A number of technical solutions of the machine are completely idiotic. Let's say a very expensive and complex arena system. For starters, it can only be used safely in a clean field with a single machine. In battle formations, but when interacting with infantry, damn those that can be. The second is a tank that clearly indicates its location with an active radar; it is doomed. Surprisingly successful guidance method, worked out since the Vietnam war on the shrike, on an active radar. Third ways to counter the darkness! Starting from this http://www.vkadre.by/sites/vkadre.by/files/imagecache/post_images_350x350/Comman
    do.jpg or RPG-30 ending with electronic warfare.

    As for sales, well, you need to understand their technology. Let's say Putin personally flew to Algeria and forgave 8 billion (!!!) dollars of debt to this very non-poor country. In exchange for the fact that part of this amount will be received in cash by factories.

    That is, a bad tank, but FREE! Moreover, buying this tank can be written off twice as three times as much debt. Of course profitable, of course they will buy!
    1. Crang
      Crang 30 July 2013 12: 33
      +5
      The old trough is your shameful stronghold.
      1. Gorchilin
        Gorchilin 30 July 2013 12: 50
        -7
        For underdeveloped citizens with such jargon, many things will be incomprehensible, and many are mysterious.

        But if it is so about the "stronghold" - tests of 1976-1978 showed that the best Soviet tank is the T-80. The best in terms of fire accuracy is T-64B. Accordingly, the worst is the T-72. Behind this conclusion there are dozens of vehicles, thousands of kilometers at ranges, and ammunition heaps.

        Oplot is the development of the T-80, its diesel version. It has a lot of extremely useful innovations, like APU. Everything is better there, starting with the control of the helm.

        It surpasses the T-90 in ALL parameters, starting with engine power (1200 versus 1000). More precisely, the many times raped veteran B-2 and 1000 forces give out with a big question and a scanty resource, which was confirmed by the power unit burned down in Malaysia.

        Today, Russia is not able to create a tank of the Oplot level.

        Where the conversation is about relatively fair trade, the T-90 loses. Suppose in Malaysia they lost to the Poles. In Thailand, lost the Bastion.

        The obvious flaws of the T-90 just led to a grand scandal and another pathos promise to make a miracle tank under the name Armata. Although, the chances of seeing something new are very small. Something new in the Union was historically done by Kharkovites or Leningraders, only a tractor could stamp tags.
        1. Rakti-kali
          Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 15: 10
          +7
          Quote: Gorchilin
          But if it is so about the "stronghold" - tests of 1976-1978 showed that the best Soviet tank is the T-80. The best in terms of fire accuracy - T-64B

          And the great ancient Ukrainians presented mankind with fire, a wheel and Egyptian pyramids ... Do not disgrace.
          1. Gorchilin
            Gorchilin 30 July 2013 19: 05
            -8
            Your idiotic thought is inappropriate.

            If you are not up to date, I hasten to inform. When the Soviet Army turned out to be three machines of the same type of different designs, state tests were carried out in ALL climatic zones. Dozens of cars, thousands of kilometers, mountains of ammunition.

            You, it’s you who are not disgraced by your idiotic passages. To boast of your own stupidity is wretched, because if you have nothing to say, then shut up.

            And do not complex, use the fire and the wheel. To health.
            1. Vereshagin
              Vereshagin 30 July 2013 22: 48
              +7
              You “cast a shadow on the wattle fence,” as the Russians say! I read the test report in the TV Newsletter. The T-64 was recognized as the weakest in operational reliability, which, incidentally, was slightly inferior to the T-80 in terms of production and repair costs and was much more expensive than the T-72. T-72 and T-80 exceeded the T-64 in average marching speed on rough terrain. The results of the shooting generally showed PAR. You yourself are sideways with the tank troops ?!
              1. Kars
                Kars 30 July 2013 23: 11
                +1
                Quote: Vereshagin
                TV Newsletter

                read? let us read.
        2. PLO
          PLO 30 July 2013 15: 54
          12

          But if it is so about the "stronghold" - tests of 1976-1978 showed that the best Soviet tank is the T-80. The best in terms of fire accuracy is T-64B. Accordingly, the worst is the T-72. Behind this conclusion there are dozens of vehicles, thousands of kilometers at ranges, and ammunition heaps.

          you write nonsense
          The T-64B was superior to the T-72A in accuracy because the T-64B was already equipped with the SUO 1A40, the same T-64A was nothing better than the T-72A, and even inferior given the problems in operating the 5TD


          It surpasses the T-90 in ALL parameters, starting with engine power (1200 versus 1000). More precisely, the many times raped veteran B-2 and 1000 forces give out with a big question and a scanty resource, which was confirmed by the power unit burned down in Malaysia.

          superiority of the current Bastion over the T-90A extremely minimal, the new T-90MS once again surpasses Oplot


          B-2 and 1000 forces give out with a big question and a scanty resource

          ha .. this is all nonsense


          Today, Russia is not able to create a tank of the Oplot level.
          Where the conversation is about relatively fair trade, the T-90 loses. Suppose in Malaysia they lost to the Poles. In Thailand, lost the Bastion.

          good thing. I laughed.
          1. Kars
            Kars 30 July 2013 16: 02
            +1
            Quote: olp
            The T-64B was superior to the T-72A in accuracy because the T-64B was already equipped with the SUO 1A40, the same T-64A was nothing better than the T-72A, and even inferior given the problems in operating 5TDF

            Will you take into account the years of adoption? And the fact that the tanks were upgraded in the process of planned capital repairs?
            Quote: olp
            the superiority of the current Oplot over the T-90A is extremely minimal; the new T-90MS again surpasses the Oplot

            The stronghold is superior to the T-90A, and the MS is not able to prove the advantage, since it is a demonstrator of technology and nothing more. At the same time, the Ukrainian DZ surpasses all known serial models of the Russian Federation.
            Quote: olp
            good thing. I laughed

            Well, yes, therefore, Armata will .. show .. in closed mode.
            1. PLO
              PLO 30 July 2013 16: 33
              +9
              Will you take into account the years of adoption? And the fact that the tanks were upgraded in the process of planned capital repairs?

              I can quite. the comrade above is clearly sick.
              these tanks were made in one country, so there was no direct competition between them.
              the reasons why the T-72A lacked an MSA were completely different than the inability of the UVZ to put it there.
              You know better than me that the T-72 was originally created as a cheaper mass version of the T-64, so it received new systems later.


              The stronghold is superior to the T-90A, and the MS is not able to prove the advantage, since it is a demonstrator of technology and nothing more. At the same time, the Ukrainian DZ surpasses all known serial models of the Russian Federation.

              The stronghold somewhat surpasses the T-90A solely because it acquired its final form later. it would be strange if this were not so.
              nevertheless, its superiority over the T-90 is minimal and lies only in a more powerful engine, in the presence of a panoramic sight and according to rumors of a better DZ.
              The T-90MS, having brought together all the worked out modern systems, demonstrates that nothing outstanding has been done in the Oplot, not to mention the fact that so far the Oplot has also not demonstrated anything special, and their number is not yet very different from one so-called "demonstrator ".

              At the same time, the Ukrainian DZ surpasses all known serial models of the Russian Federation.

              all known and serial very out of place.
              But can this Ukrainian DZ be called serial in relation to serial Contact-5?

              Well, yes, therefore, Armata will .. show .. in closed mode.

              let's see what they show there.
              in any case, this will result in a result.
              or they will show something worthwhile and we will wait for Armat, or .. they will start finishing and purchasing the T-90MS, which will very quickly surpass Oplot in "seriality"
              1. Kars
                Kars 30 July 2013 16: 46
                +1
                Quote: olp
                I can quite.

                does not look like it
                Quote: olp
                there was no direct competition between them.

                there was a huge one, with undercover wrestling and paraparatchiki.
                Quote: olp
                the reasons why the T-72A lacked an MSA were completely different than the inability of the UVZ to put it there.

                this does not change the fact of the absence of the SLA

                Quote: olp
                You know better than me that the T-72 was originally created as a cheaper mass version of the T-64

                Then what are you writing about?
                Quote: olp
                the raft somewhat exceeds the T-90A solely because it acquired its final form later

                He is simply exceedingly superior.

                Quote: olp
                nevertheless, its superiority over the T-90 is minimal and lies only in a more powerful engine, in the presence of a panoramic sight and according to rumors of a better DZ.

                Well, if this far from complete list is minimal. It is likely that the tank should fly just to exceed the T-90A.
                Quote: olp
                T-90MS, bringing together all the developed modern systems, demonstrates that nothing outstanding has been done in the Bastion,

                He did not collect anything as such. It is only rumored that the new SLA is not very provable. Nor did the MS pass state tests or receive export contracts.
                Quote: olp
                all famous and serial are very out of place.
                But can this Ukrainian DZ be called serial in relation to serial Contact-5?

                Contact -5 is a Soviet system, and we also have it. So Knife and Doublet
                Quote: olp
                let's see what they show there.
                Wow, were you invited?
                Quote: olp
                or .. will begin to finish and buy T-90MS
                how will they start then we'll see.
                1. PLO
                  PLO 30 July 2013 17: 14
                  11
                  does not look like it

                  it looks like.

                  there was a huge one, with undercover wrestling and paraparatchiki.

                  direct struggle with foreign tanks and undercover different things.

                  this does not change the fact of the absence of the SLA

                  does not change.
                  this changes the reason why the T-64B was superior to the T-72A in accuracy
                  and as soon as it became possible to install these systems on the T-72 and T-80, t-64 was gladly abandoned and stopped production.

                  He is simply exceedingly superior.

                  I agree, exclusively.
                  superior only in engine power

                  Well, if this far from complete list is minimal. It is likely that the tank should fly just to exceed the T-90A.

                  Well, at least go to exhibitions, and not stand aside.

                  He did not collect anything as such. It is only rumored that the new SLA is not very provable. Nor did the MS pass state tests or receive export contracts.

                  he put together everything he needed.
                  new DZ, new MSA, new engine.
                  and the presence of electronics in the Oplot case is generally unprovable. They say that instead of a panoramic sight, a mock-up made of a leaky bucket is installed on the stronghold.

                  And while the MS did not pass state tests, nor received export contracts.

                  xs whether the T-90MS GSI passed, but the fact that their Bastion did not pass is fully known for sure.
                  the fact that the Oplot was not fired upon until the complete destruction of the fact. and you can’t cover a tower with a signed paper on supposedly passed GSI, unless you can use the toilet for its intended purpose.


                  Contact -5 is a Soviet system, and we also have it. So Knife and Doublet

                  Soviet? and you are sure that the Knife and the Doublet were not developed at the advice. there we still have many projects pulled out of the box and say that new)
                  Relic?

                  Wow, were you invited?

                  yes you are a comedian) create a joint number in the circus.

                  how will they start then we'll see.

                  sure to see.
                  1. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 17: 44
                    +1
                    Quote: olp
                    it looks like.

                    No, and already several times you do not take into account
                    Quote: Kars
                    Will you take into account the years of adoption? And the fact that the tanks were upgraded in the process of planned capital repairs?


                    Quote: olp
                    undercover different things

                    it's about competition
                    Quote: olp
                    these tanks were made in one country, so there was no direct competition between them

                    and you are already going to import tanks to drag in. So what to talk about with you?
                    Quote: olp
                    I agree, exclusively.

                    In all respects, including engine power. It is even possible to use extended BPS, which is done on Pakistani T-80UD tanks
                    Quote: olp
                    Well, at least go to exhibitions, and not stand aside.

                    Why the Bastion to prove that he can ride it is already cantracted, this is the destiny of the MS. If they bring it to the standing, they will laugh at all.
                    Quote: olp
                    xs whether the T-90MS GSI passed, but the fact that their Bastion did not pass is fully known for sure.
                    According to Khlopotov, so you tell it there. The fact on the face of the GSI Oplot is past. And it was ordered.

                    Quote: olp
                    Soviet? Are you sure that the Knife and Duplet were not developed with advice
                    Already with no advice. But you may well start digging up to the Israeli Blazer, the first production DZ

                    Quote: olp
                    Relic?

                    So he just loses.

                    Quote: olp
                    yes you are a comedian) create a joint number in the circus.

                    So no? Then what are you going to watch?
                    Quote: olp
                    u so Armata will .. show .. in closed mode.
                    let's see what they show there.


                    Quote: olp
                    sure to see.

                    Vryatli, UVZ easier to deflate money for Armata.
                    1. PLO
                      PLO 30 July 2013 18: 03
                      +6
                      No, and already several times you do not take into account

                      you feel it again.
                      I just considered it.

                      it's about competition

                      what exactly, so far I have not caught the essence

                      and you are already going to import tanks to drag in. So what to talk about with you?

                      imported? what kind of foreign tanks were imported into the USSR? some nonsense


                      In all respects, including engine power. It is even possible to use extended BPS, which is done on Pakistani T-80UD tanks

                      in all respects it was inferior to the T-90A.
                      exceeded perhaps in engine power.


                      Why the Bastion to prove that he can ride it is already cantracted, this is the destiny of the MS. If they bring it to the standing, they will laugh at all.

                      Under the contracts, Oplot generally stands far away from the T-90, so drive the Oplot and drive before proving anything

                      According to Khlopotov, so you tell it there. The fact on the face of the GSI Oplot is past. And it was ordered.

                      words are one thing. The facts are different. even if Tarasenko says that two times two equals four, this will not become untrue, unlike the rest of his delirium.

                      So he just loses.

                      rumored ..

                      So no? Then what are you going to watch?

                      performances of those who will watch

                      Vryatli, UVZ easier to deflate money for Armata.

                      easier, but who will allow it.
                      1. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 18: 28
                        +1
                        Quote: olp
                        you feel it again.
                        I just considered it.

                        Do not consider.
                        Quote: olp
                        what exactly, so far I have not caught the essence

                        it’s hard for you when you write what you yourself don’t understand.
                        Quote: olp
                        these tanks were made in one country, so there was no direct competition between them

                        I repeat. COMPETITION WAS.
                        Quote: olp
                        imported? what kind of foreign tanks were imported into the USSR? some nonsense
                        so don’t write nonsense

                        Quote: olp

                        these tanks were made in one country, so there was no direct competition between them


                        direct struggle with foreign tanks and undercover different things.

                        Quote: olp
                        words are one thing. The facts are different.

                        Khlopotov has no facts. But there is an act on passing state tests.
                        Quote: olp
                        according to rumors.
                        Here are all the rumors, but there is not even a rumor about the Relic about its anti-tandem.

                        Quote: olp
                        performances of those who will watch

                        And they will naturally tell the whole world the pure truth)) they need to keep apart from military secrets and maintain their image.
                        Therefore, I can approximately now voice what they say. Super, superior to foreign counterparts, etc.

                        Quote: olp
                        easier, but who will allow it.
                        UVZ is a monopolist, is preparing for privatization - who will forbid him? Who will delegate the production of Almaty? Omsk? Leningrad?
                      2. PLO
                        PLO 30 July 2013 18: 43
                        +5
                        Do not consider.

                        I take into account.

                        it’s hard for you when you write what you yourself don’t understand.

                        do not project your complexes on others.

                        I repeat. COMPETITION WAS.

                        what exactly?

                        so don’t write nonsense

                        I did not write it. I quoted you.

                        Khlopotov has no facts. But there is an act on passing state tests.

                        the facts are, if you do not want to notice them these are your problems
                        there is of course, but such an act can only be wiped

                        Here are all the rumors, but there is not even a rumor about the Relic about its anti-tandem.

                        who knows who knows..

                        And they will naturally tell the whole world the pure truth)) they need to keep apart from military secrets and maintain their image.
                        Therefore, I can approximately now voice what they say. Super, superior to foreign counterparts, etc.

                        they will say. The main thing is to understand correctly.
                        rumors that they will show there sooner or later (but rather very soon) will still leak out, and then it will be possible to draw a conclusion.

                        UVZ is a monopolist, is preparing for privatization - who will forbid him? Who will delegate the production of Almaty? Omsk? Leningrad?

                        Yes, at least by the fact that producing the already completed T-90MS will be much more profitable if they continue to cut the headstock without producing the T-90, then something worthwhile will still be.
                      3. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 19: 12
                        +1
                        Quote: olp
                        I take into account.

                        do not consider.
                        Quote: olp
                        do not project your complexes on others.

                        Do not hide them, admit it and as they say you may feel better.

                        Quote: olp
                        what exactly?

                        in tank production, we’re talking about tanks here.
                        Quote: olp
                        there are facts

                        they are not. If there is, give at least one reliable fact.
                        Quote: olp
                        who knows who knows

                        everyone knows that you wouldn’t keep silent about this. Considering that you already drag him to exhibitions.

                        Quote: olp
                        will say

                        Blessed is he who believes))) probably at the metro you also play thimbles?

                        Quote: olp
                        Yes, at least by the fact that producing the already completed T-90MS will be much more profitable
                        where did you get it? It will be necessary to produce its branch, send it to the troops, and not feed it with fairy tales and take money for scientific research projects.
                      4. PLO
                        PLO 30 July 2013 19: 28
                        +3
                        do not consider.

                        took into account, take into account and will take into account.

                        Do not hide them, admit it and as they say you may feel better.

                        your personal experience?

                        in tank production, we’re talking about tanks here.

                        It is in production.
                        the niche assigned to the T-64 and T-72 suited everyone, the main thing is that these tanks be produced. and there was no direct competition for the T-72 to be superior to the entire T-64.


                        they are not. If there is, give at least one reliable fact.

                        there is. there was one Bastion before the tests, one Bastion remained after the tests.

                        Blessed is he who believes))) probably at the metro you also play thimbles?

                        they also said about the T-95 that they would not say anything.

                        where did you get it? It will be necessary to produce its branch, send it to the troops, and not feed it with fairy tales and take money for scientific research projects.

                        the money for the production of hundreds of T-90MS tanks will be many times higher than the money for the OKR Armata
                      5. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 19: 54
                        +1
                        Quote: olp
                        took into account, take into account and will take into account

                        So why aren't you doing this?
                        Quote: olp
                        your personal experience?

                        They say. And yet you were the first to talk about the complexes - you can see closer.
                        Quote: olp
                        It is in production.
                        the niche assigned to the T-64 and T-72 suited everyone, the main thing is that these tanks be produced. and direct competition so that the T-72 must be superior in all T-64 was not

                        So the T-72 was superior to the T-64 in terms of cheapness, simplicity and ability to be mass-produced. Like it was not a pity to export it, where it or the Arabs would leave it. Or the ceramics measure.
                        Quote: olp
                        st. there was one Bastion before the tests, one Bastion remained after the tests.

                        Prove that he was alone. I can prove that he withstood the shelling. Changed the DZ modules. And not like the T-90 went to the scrap.


                        Quote: olp
                        they also said about the T-95 that they would not say anything.

                        and what did they say? The whole truth?
                        Quote: olp
                        the money for the production of hundreds of T-90MS tanks will be many times higher than the money for the OKR Armata
                        Are you sure of this? But should you pay allies? Do you buy metal? Electronics? Does UVZ need this? Or do you think that if the tank costs 1 mil dolar, then the profit of the plant is 1 mil dollars?
                      6. PLO
                        PLO 30 July 2013 20: 23
                        +3
                        So why aren't you doing this?

                        doing it too

                        They say. And yet you are the first about the complexes
                        talking - you can see closer.

                        no, after all, you started talking what will become easier, then you know.


                        So the T-72 was superior to the T-64 in terms of cheapness, simplicity and ability to be mass-produced. Like it was not a pity to export it, where it or the Arabs would leave it. Or the ceramics measure.

                        At the same time, the T-72 was superior to the T-64 in reliability, and this is the main characteristic of the tank.
                        all other systems were not installed on it in order to achieve cheapness, but could be easily installed there if the party demanded.

                        Prove that he was alone. I can prove that he withstood the shelling. Changed the DZ modules. And not like the T-90 went to the scrap.

                        prove first that it was a tank, not a wooden model.

                        and what did they say? The whole truth?

                        have said enough. the whole story with armature began shortly after that notorious show.

                        Are you sure of this? But should you pay allies? Do you buy metal? Electronics? Does UVZ need this? Or do you think that if the tank costs 1 mil dolar, then the profit of the plant is 1 mil dollars?

                        sure
                        for that R&D money, the wages of workers sitting idle still have to be paid.
                      7. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 20: 29
                        +1
                        Quote: olp
                        doing it too

                        don't do
                        Quote: olp
                        no, after all, you started talking what will become easier, then you know.

                        I answered you, I had to torment Google.
                        Quote: olp
                        At the same time, the T-72 was superior to the T-64 in reliability, and this is the main characteristic of the tank.

                        no not exceeded.
                        And this is not the main characteristic. Important but not the main.
                        Quote: olp
                        prove first that it was a tank, not a wooden model.

                        oh, we’re generally cool to carry a wooden model to the exhibitions, and that no one would have guessed. Yes, and the Thais should be screwed up))
                        Quote: olp
                        have said enough

                        said almost nothing.

                        Quote: olp
                        for that R&D money, the wages of workers sitting idle still have to be paid.

                        It will come to repeat - blessed is he who believes. Workers make mash kits for India, and for two years 90 tanks fought for Azerbaijan.
                        And salaries in the CIS countries are not the largest part in costs)))
                      8. PLO
                        PLO 30 July 2013 20: 46
                        +2
                        don't do

                        I’m doing it, right now I did it again.

                        I answered you, I had to torment Google.

                        come on, admit it. I will not tell anyone.


                        no not exceeded.
                        And this is not the main characteristic. Important but not the main.

                        no exceeded

                        said almost nothing.

                        nevertheless said, even if almost

                        It will come to repeat - blessed is he who believes. Workers make mash kits for India, and for two years 90 tanks fought for Azerbaijan.
                        And salaries in the CIS countries are not the largest part in costs)))

                        have to repeat)
                        taking into account the fact that you believe that they will cut armature, you are blessed)
                      9. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 20: 51
                        +1
                        Quote: olp
                        I’m doing it, right now I did it again.

                        You are freezing right now.
                        Quote: olp
                        come on, admit it. I will not tell anyone.

                        you are lying too much. And do not assume that if you have complexes, then others have them.
                        Quote: olp
                        no exceeded

                        no, not superior.
                        Quote: olp
                        nevertheless said, even if almost

                        and they say about armature.
                        and then they will begin to build Barmata, which will be an improved version of Armata. And they will show Barmata next year, without fail.

                        Quote: olp
                        taking into account the fact that you believe that they will cut armature, you are blessed
                        they’re already sawing it.
                      10. PLO
                        PLO 30 July 2013 21: 01
                        +2
                        You are freezing right now.

                        what does it mean?


                        you are lying too much. And do not assume that if you have complexes, then others have them.

                        and you mean lying in moderation? how do you measure?

                        no, not superior.

                        no, no, not superior.


                        and they say about armature.
                        and then they will begin to build Barmata, which will be an improved version of Armata. And they will show Barmata next year, without fail.

                        certainly show.

                        they’re already sawing it.

                        you are blessed
                      11. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 21: 20
                        +1
                        Quote: olp
                        what does it mean?

                        Quote: Kars
                        You are freezing right now

                        Quote: olp
                        and you mean lying in moderation? how do you measure?

                        And I do not say that I'm lying.

                        Quote: olp
                        certainly show.

                        how is the t-95?
                        Quote: olp
                        you are blessed
                        no it's you naive
                      12. PLO
                        PLO 30 July 2013 21: 30
                        +1
                        And I do not say that I'm lying.

                        as if I said that I was lying)

                        how is the t-95? no it's you naive

                        yes like T-95
                        at least it turns out that Armata is not a myth ..

                        no it's you naive

                        you are wrong
                      13. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 21: 41
                        +1
                        Quote: olp
                        as if I said that I was lying)

                        This I say that you are lying.
                        For example, about the fact that no one needs the T-64 for nothing, and you checked it.
                        Quote: olp
                        yes like T-95
                        at least it turns out that Armata is not a myth.

                        Well, any TPZ will be able to get its own running layout of the appearance)))
                        Quote: olp
                        you are wrong
                        sawing, sawing - even sparks fly.
                      14. PLO
                        PLO 30 July 2013 21: 50
                        +1
                        This I say that you are lying.

                        you're lying shamelessly again.
                        for example, about the fact that you can prove that the Bastion was shelled.

                        Well, any TPZ will be able to get its own running layout of the appearance)))

                        will be able. but what does the running layout have to do with it?

                        sawing, sawing - even sparks fly.

                        already flies in Ukraine?
                      15. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 21: 59
                        +1
                        Quote: olp
                        for example, about the fact that you can prove that the Bastion was shelled.

                        Give a quote. I argued that you cannot prove that you have any facts about state trials of BM Oplot.
                        Quote: olp
                        will be able. but what does the running layout have to do with it?

                        so it will be shown as T-95, and as Armata.
                        Quote: olp
                        already flies in Ukraine?

                        will fly with yours. But the fact that Armata is already dragging on the face.
                      16. PLO
                        PLO 30 July 2013 22: 06
                        +1
                        please
                        I can prove that he withstood the shelling


                        so it will be shown as T-95, and as Armata.

                        as we show it, we will see in the fall.

                        will fly with yours. But the fact that Armata is already dragging on the face.

                        then you worry there.
                        judging by the early infe, the terms by which Armata will be ready in 2013 were initially called all nonsense.
                      17. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 23: 20
                        +1
                        Quote: olp
                        I can prove that he withstood the shelling

                        but completely weak phrase?

                        Quote: Kars
                        Quote: olp
                        st. there was one Bastion before the tests, one Bastion remained after the tests.
                        Prove that he was alone. I can prove that he withstood the shelling. Changed the DZ modules. And not like the T-90 went to the scrap.


                        And is not the presence of a riding tank in itself a proof of sustaining the shelling? And you can try to prove that the shelling was not carried out.
                        I repeat - you have no reliable facts, except for the act of passing the state tests with the Oplot tank and its adoption by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. And the order of the Thai army.
                        Quote: olp
                        as we show it, we will see in the fall.

                        You won’t see anything. It’s a closed warehouse, but you forgot to send an invitation ((you will hear that it has no analogues, it’s superior and all that.
                        Quote: olp
                        then you worry there.
                        judging by the early infe the terms by which Armata will be ready in 2013

                        Already mid-2013)) and there is nothing ready for the info. Or did you send the Mechanic to the blacklist? Or your guru Gurk Khan?
                      18. PLO
                        PLO 30 July 2013 23: 34
                        +2
                        And is not the presence of a riding tank in itself a proof of sustaining the shelling? And you can try to prove that the shelling was not carried out.

                        no not proof
                        the tank is fired until it becomes worthless. if he rides, it means that he was either not fired, or could not become worthless)

                        I repeat - you have no reliable facts, except for the act of passing the state tests with the Oplot tank and its adoption by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. And the order of the Thai army.

                        You do not have reliable evidence to the contrary, and doubts about full-fledged GIs are completely justified.

                        You won’t see anything. It’s a closed warehouse, but you forgot to send an invitation ((you will hear that it has no analogues, it’s superior and all that.

                        not used to listening to such husk.

                        Already mid-2013)) and there is nothing ready for the info. Or did you send the Mechanic to the blacklist? Or your guru Gurk Khan?

                        The mechanic gave quite a lot of interesting information, but sometimes it is difficult for me to understand it as a non-specialist.
                        Gurkhan never considered his guru, he has his own pens.
                      19. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 23: 44
                        +1
                        Quote: olp
                        Ankh is shelled until it becomes unusable

                        Why? Where did you read this? And why is it so proud that the T-90, after the shelling, itself drove up to the commission?
                        Quote: olp
                        , or could not be worthless)
                        which shows the high class of Bastion.

                        Quote: olp
                        you have no reliable evidence to the contrary, and doubts about full-fledged GIs are quite justified
                        These are your personal problems. It turned out to be enough for the Thais who pay their money for a stronghold.

                        Quote: olp
                        not used to listening to such husk.
                        Yes, you are made up of it. And this year you will not see anything but hear it.

                        Quote: olp
                        The mechanic gave a lot of interesting information, but sometimes it is difficult for me to understand it as a non-specialist
                        what’s ore to understand - to redo the frontal reservation of the platform, and he gave a term of at least a year.

                        Quote: olp
                        Gurkhan never considered his guru

                        Yeah, yeah.
  • alone
    alone 30 July 2013 21: 45
    -1
    workers will have to fight another two years for 94 t-90s for azerbaijan
  • svp67
    svp67 30 July 2013 22: 19
    +2
    Quote: olp
    no not exceeded.
    Yes excelled. How ANY EASIER made, and even from the TESTED and ROLLED ON OTHER TANKES mechanisms, assemblies and units ...
  • PLO
    PLO 30 July 2013 22: 51
    +1
    Yes excelled. How ANY EASIER made, and even from the TESTED and ROLLED ON OTHER TANKES mechanisms, assemblies and units ...

    I don’t quite understand what exactly you meant.
    who was superior to whom and in what?

    the meaning of the quote "no, did not exceed" has long been lost
  • svp67
    svp67 31 July 2013 01: 42
    +1
    Quote: olp
    I don’t quite understand what exactly you meant.
    who was superior to whom and in what?
    Not "who", but "what. The T72 has always outperformed the T64 in reliability

    Quote: svp67
    How ANY EASIER made, and even from the TESTED and ROLLED ON OTHER TANKES mechanisms, assemblies and units ...
  • svp67
    svp67 30 July 2013 22: 17
    0
    Quote: olp
    At the same time, the T-72 was superior to the T-64 in reliability, and this is the main characteristic of the tank.

    It’s strange, but everyone thinks it’s combat effectiveness. If we take this characteristic as the main one, then it's time to return the T55 to the conveyor
  • PLO
    PLO 30 July 2013 22: 57
    0
    It’s strange, but everyone thinks it’s combat effectiveness. If we take this characteristic as the main one, then it's time to return the T55 to the conveyor

    you know combat effectiveness is too vague a term. What exactly do you invest there?
  • svp67
    svp67 31 July 2013 02: 57
    +1
    Quote: olp
    you know combat effectiveness is too vague a term. What exactly do you invest there?

    Combat effectiveness
    - the ability of the tank to solve combat tasks assigned to it
    According to the classic definition [1], combat effectiveness is a generalized concept that characterizes the degree of fitness of a combat weapon to fulfill its combat missions.

    For a numerical measurement of combat effectiveness in accordance with the theory of operations research, a criterion of combat effectiveness is determined, which is called an indicator of combat effectiveness. The combat effectiveness indicator should correspond to the task facing the combat weapon. So, if a combat vehicle is faced with the task of achieving a very definite result (hitting an aircraft, sinking a ship, hitting all planes as part of an attacking group, etc.), then the probability of a combat mission will be a natural indicator of effectiveness. In another case, if the combat vehicle is faced with the task of inflicting the maximum possible damage, then the average value (mathematical expectation) of the damage caused to the enemy will be a natural indicator of effectiveness.

    The combat effectiveness of a combat weapon with perfect rear support, with perfect control and in the absence of enemy opposition is called combat potential. The combat potential is characterized by the limit values ​​of the combat effectiveness indicators, which, in principle, can be achieved by a combat weapon.

    The combat potential of a combat weapon, which is realized in the specific conditions of a combat situation for a specified time, is called combat capabilities.

    The concepts of combat effectiveness, combat potential, and combat capabilities apply to both single combat weapons and combat weapon groupings. [2]
  • Prohor
    Prohor 6 August 2013 18: 56
    0
    Here's to you personally, Kars, I'll tell you a little secret. Recently, one person who spoke with the director of one of the enterprises producing BPS, said that the director complained about the complete lack of consistency between the manufacturers of various elements of this BPS itself, and after all, KV, the main charge pan, "arrow", burning hulls and gunpowder for the main and additional charges, tracers, igniter bags with DRP, finally "- all this is done at different factories! And no" Lead "is produced in Russia, all the tales about it are masturbation for self-consolation against the background of the absolute superiority of the sworn" friends "in real production anti-tank weapons! If there is "Armata" - it will shoot "Mango" at best, if not with stone cannonballs. I would like to be a patriot, but knowing "in real life" the management of state-owned enterprises and local and regional authorities, you stop even hoping for "a wonderful future for Russia." There will be no future with these fagots.
  • maxvet
    maxvet 31 July 2013 11: 53
    +3
    UVZ monopolist
    Is the plant named after Malyshev not a monopolist? At the same time, it produces the best tank (in your words) in the world
  • Kars
    Kars 31 July 2013 14: 06
    +1
    Quote: maxvet
    Is the plant named after Malyshev not a monopolist?

    Monopolist. But he doesn’t have a package from the state for deliveries of the tank. He is in a requesting position.

    and supplies the best tank abroad.
  • maxvet
    maxvet 31 July 2013 22: 17
    0
    Kars, I’m also saying that a monopolist can give out good equipment, otherwise, reading your posts, I get the feeling that monopolism is a serious sin for you
    Although, in my purely personal opinion, the design bureau in Omsk should have been left (but it is necessary without several similar vehicles in service)
  • Kars
    Kars 31 July 2013 22: 40
    +1
    Quote: maxvet
    Ars, I mean that a monopolist can give out good equipment,

    Maybe, but not in the capitalist world. And good - and not the best, and pricing. For Ukraine, it’s not scary. We don’t need tanks, but Russia needs tanks. And there is money for tanks. Therefore, there is a basis for abuse and there is no incentive to to perfection.

    and there is also competition in Ukraine. A little about the modernization of tanks, and export contracts between tank repair plants.
  • Corneli
    Corneli 30 July 2013 19: 35
    0
    Quote: olp
    xs whether the T-90MS GSI passed, but the fact that their Bastion did not pass is fully known for sure.
    the fact that the Oplot was not fired upon until the complete destruction of the fact. and you can’t cover a tower with a signed paper on supposedly passed GSI, unless you can use the toilet for its intended purpose.

    A toilet, not a toilet, but the facts speak for themselves: Out of 4 tanks in the tender (German Leopard 2A4, Russian T-90, South Korean K1 and Ukrainian "Oplot") Thais for some reason chose the "toilet" Oplot! wassat Apparently they did not take into account your opinion (As you said:
    Quote: olp
    the facts are, if you do not want to notice them these are your problems
    there is of course, but such an act can only be wiped
  • svp67
    svp67 30 July 2013 22: 08
    +1
    Quote: olp
    and as soon as it became possible to install these systems on the T-72 and T-80, t-64 was gladly abandoned and stopped production.
    Actually, a tower was installed on the T80, with a new LMS and sighting systems, including the KVV designed and planned for installation on the modernized T64. The result is T80U
  • Gorchilin
    Gorchilin 30 July 2013 16: 39
    -8
    There's a lot of "because" starting with the chassis. Let me remind you that the T-80, with a similar fire control system in terms of its parameters, had a WORSE firing accuracy than the T-64B. Let me remind you that this is the conclusion of the state commission, two years of testing, dozens of tanks, thousands of kilometers in all climatic zones.

    At the expense of the superiority of the stronghold, once again, this is the development of the T-80. And the T-90 remained as a tractor. There is superiority in everything, starting with engine power and the number of shells in the MZ / AZ.

    "ha .. this is generally nonsense" - evaluate the importance of your moronic comment on this simple scale: http://blog.i.ua/user/2661780/360143
    Once again, four-stroke engines with a large backpressure cannot and will not work normally. They do not work, burn on the fly. And the case in Malaysia is a clear confirmation of this.

    ..rad was to please you. Laughter for no reason is a sign of fooling around
    1. PLO
      PLO 30 July 2013 16: 55
      10
      There's a lot of "because" starting with the chassis. Let me remind you that the T-80, with a similar fire control system in terms of its parameters, had a WORSE firing accuracy than the T-64B. Let me remind you that this is the conclusion of the state commission, two years of testing, dozens of tanks, thousands of kilometers in all climatic zones.

      remind you will blog Tarasenko
      while these tests were carried out, neither the T-72A nor the T-80A had the same SLA

      At the expense of the superiority of the stronghold, once again, this is the development of the T-80. And the T-90 remained as a tractor. There is superiority in everything, starting with engine power and the number of shells in the MZ / AZ.

      the difference between 1200hls and 1130hls is far from significant, and taking into account the mass of the T-90A and Oplot tanks, it’s no different at all.
      and you can repeat the mantra about the number of shells as much as you like.
      in AZ there are enough of them, the layout of AZ and MZ is the most delicious.

      "ha .. this is generally nonsense" - appreciate the importance of your moronic
      comments on this simple scale:

      you obviously have problems with the logic.
      I’m not used to throwing beads in front of pigs.
      if you want facts, give your own arguments to begin with,

      Once again, four-stroke engines with a large backpressure cannot and will not work normally. They do not work, burn on the fly. And the case in Malaysia is a clear confirmation of this.

      Another very reasoned answer.

      ..rad was to please you. Laughter for no reason is a sign of fooling around

      Do not flirt, you need to perform with such a number in the circus.
    2. Vereshagin
      Vereshagin 30 July 2013 23: 18
      +4
      You from what sources took this "nonsense", in no way sucked out of your own finger! There is no difference in firing accuracy for the T-64B and T-80, which have the same aggregate base of the OMS !!! Despite the softer suspension of 64 matches, this gain is leveled by the power of the HV stabilizer. I personally shot from all three cars, more from the T-64. Responsibly declare - on daytime shooting 64-ka with 80-koy level, 72-ka horizontal stabilization is slightly worse.
      And about the “flying and burning” four-stroke engines - in general, “smiled”! Did you joke like that or is it serious? I’ll tell you a secret from a book that you do not seem to have read to me - called “Technical Thermodynamics”. So, the authors of this book assure all who read it in the opposite - these two-stroke diesel engines do not tolerate backpressure at the output. Therefore, on all tanks with two-stroke engines TWO OPVT PIPES !!!
      1. svp67
        svp67 1 August 2013 22: 49
        0
        Quote: Vereshagin
        these two-stroke diesel engines do not tolerate backpressure at the exit.
        Like GTD ...
    3. svp67
      svp67 31 July 2013 01: 00
      +2
      Quote: Gorchilin
      I remind you that the T-80 with a similar SLA in terms of parameters had the worst shooting accuracy than the T-64B.

      Please do not tell this nonsense to anyone else, if there are tankers who fired and from that and from another vehicle, to put it mildly, they will not understand you. The T80B has better ride performance, which with the equivalent T64B FCS gives the best conditions for firing the crew ...
      1. Gorchilin
        Gorchilin 31 July 2013 10: 10
        -2
        Greetings from 1976-1978, there this question was established very clearly, at the state level.
  • svp67
    svp67 30 July 2013 22: 10
    0
    Quote: olp
    the same T-64A was no better than the T-72A, and even inferior given the problems in operating the 5TD
    Unless, of course, the presence of "combined" armor is perceived as superiority, then probably YES ...
    1. Rakti-kali
      Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 23: 53
      +3
      And you do not confuse T-72A with T-72M for an hour? Ashka EMNIP combination on the VLD and the tower was originally. But it was not on the tower at T-72 without letters and T-72M, the one that is exported.
      1. svp67
        svp67 31 July 2013 01: 11
        0
        Quote: Rakti-Kali
        And you do not confuse T-72A with T-72M?
        Well, if that, and confused, then not by much
        In the 1976 year at UVZ there were attempts to produce towers used on the T-64A with lined corundum balls, but they failed to master such a technology there. This required new production facilities and the development of new technologies that were not created. The reason for this was the desire to reduce the cost of T-72A, which were also massively supplied to foreign countries. Thus, the resistance of the turret from the BPS of the T-64A tank exceeded that of the T-72A by 10%, and the anti-cumulative resistance was higher by 15 ... 20%.
        1. Rakti-kali
          Rakti-kali 31 July 2013 02: 17
          +3
          Quote: svp67
          Thus, the tower’s resistance to the TPS of the T-64A tank exceeded that of the T-72A by 10%, and the anti-cumulative resistance was 15 ... 20% higher.

          Where is it from? Most likely the mistake is really - T-72 (homogeneous, since 1977 sand rods) T-72M (homogeneous tower), and T-72M1 (sand rods), T-72A - ceramics, no worse than what was on T- 64A or T-64B.
          1. svp67
            svp67 31 July 2013 02: 25
            0
            Quote: Rakti-Kali
            Where is it from?


            http://btvt.narod.ru/4/armor.htm
    2. Gorchilin
      Gorchilin 31 July 2013 10: 11
      -2
      Plus- the helplessness and helplessness of the T-72 in the city and in the mountains (you can not use the ZPU), plus the inability to immediately overcome any large water obstacles, plus where it is like the worst cross, etc.
      1. Rakti-kali
        Rakti-kali 31 July 2013 12: 08
        +2
        Quote: Gorchilin
        Plus- the helplessness and helplessness of the T-72 in the city and in the mountains (you can not use the ZPU), plus the inability to immediately overcome any large water obstacles, plus where it is like the worst cross, etc.

        Dmitry Ilyich, were you banned on samizdat? Finish already here graphomania. Your stream of consciousness is at least ridiculous.
        1. Gorchilin
          Gorchilin 31 July 2013 12: 16
          -2
          Who is somewhere, but the stupid beast again in a personal debate.

          What's so wrong? It is not clear that in urban battles the T-72 can not use ZPU? This was noted during the hostilities in Chechnya; TODAY the Syrian tankers feel it in their own skin.

          Well, stupid cattle on the topic in any way, it climbs into a personal showdown.

          T-72 trough, if it is difficult for you to admit this sad fact, then personally your details.
          1. Rakti-kali
            Rakti-kali 31 July 2013 14: 27
            +4
            Quote: Gorchilin
            Who is somewhere, but the stupid beast again in a personal debate.

            I sincerely appreciate your self-criticism. It is wonderful that you are aware of your shortcomings. Just tie with graphomania, especially in a topic that you do not understand.
            Quote: Gorchilin
            It is not clear that in urban battles the T-72 can not use ZPU? This was noted during the fighting in Chechnya.

            Throw this nonsense - it's heavy! You can use ZPU even in urban battles. Yes, it’s risky, but war is generally a risky thing, and sometimes they kill, and even very cautious ones.
            Further more - firstly, of 12.7 I can’t penetrate the capital wall of a brick building (30 perforates it with armor-piercing holes, PF disassembles it slowly, not very efficiently, but very effectively), and secondly, to change the tape box to T-64 all the same, I have to get out from under the armor, thirdly, I see so little from the tank in the city and I focus all my attention on finding the target, I just NEVER indulge in a machine gun (and how much free time the company commander or battalion ... can’t put into words ...)
            So sick, would you cover up your inexhaustible fountain of stupidity, so as not to defile the senses of intelligent people. Do you want to FAP on T-64, Dmitry Ilyich, go to Andryusha Tarasenko.
  • ed65b
    ed65b 30 July 2013 21: 18
    0
    Without a bazaar t-80 awesome car.
  • Rakti-kali
    Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 15: 08
    +5
    Quote: Gorchilin
    Stop promoting this old trough!

    My dear, do not eat these mushrooms anymore. From them you have Diarea Verbum.
    1. Gorchilin
      Gorchilin 30 July 2013 16: 40
      16 th
      Who is where, and stupid cattle in a personal showdown. Vali in your own pigsty, grunt there with your brothers on an underdeveloped mind!
      1. Rakti-kali
        Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 17: 40
        +6
        Quote: Gorchilin
        Who is where, and stupid cattle in a personal showdown. Vali in your own pigsty, grunt there with your brothers on an underdeveloped mind!

        Well, what are you ... You should not project your own personality on others. And this ... take a sedative, and if you forgot where it lies, ask the orderly to help.
        1. Gorchilin
          Gorchilin 30 July 2013 17: 44
          -7
          And again, stupid cattle in a personal showdown! Dumb cattle on the topic can not be, she would discuss the identity of the interlocutor
          1. Vereshagin
            Vereshagin 30 July 2013 23: 23
            +2
            Your personality is deceitful and boorish !!! You do not belong among normal people ...
      2. Ulan
        Ulan 30 July 2013 17: 59
        +4
        Since you are completely rude, you are not sure of your rightness. Why then enter into a dispute? For the sake of a dispute? Or to quarrel?
        1. Gorchilin
          Gorchilin 30 July 2013 18: 39
          10 th
          And I’m just urging you not to go personal, that’s the argument, you can prove the truth.

          And if some dumb cattle is only a person and is ready to discuss, this is, in fact, only her bestial business
  • Flooding
    Flooding 30 July 2013 17: 31
    +4
    Quote: Gorchilin
    Moreover, at the expense of cheap stuff, it's not true, it was precisely about him that Postnikov said "I don't need a tank for 118 million"

    less than $ 4 million per tank - is that expensive for you?
    Well then buy a Leopard. After all, that same Postnikov threatened to buy three Leopards for 118 million rubles.
  • family tree
    family tree 30 July 2013 23: 12
    +3
    Quote: Gorchilin
    Stop promoting this old trough!

    Here, "Abrams" seems to be no longer PR. And that you do not like Kharkiv people so much, T-90, about eighty percent of their development, on the chassis and MTO at least repeat
  • gych
    gych 30 July 2013 13: 09
    0
    Quote: Seraphim
    We now reach Berlin, if that. But it is not known where the Ukrainian army will get, or rather, what it will reach.

    Quote: Krang
    The old trough is your shameful stronghold.
    Well, well! By the way, here too, according to yours, the spilled PRs? Btvt.narod.ru/4/t84vst90skr2.htm. Guys, let's live together! It's good to arrange kusalovo between us!
    1. Gorchilin
      Gorchilin 30 July 2013 13: 18
      -6
      The question is not Mochilov, the question is the fervent religious faith of individual citizens in virtual phantoms. Well, there is a T-72 trough, a symbol of faith. Whoever encroaches will be damned.

      Simple questions - simple answers. You can even compare it with the T-64B.

      What is the best way when a tank has more or less shells in MZ / AZ?

      What is the best way when he has a full-fledged SLA, or instead of it, primitive sights?

      What is the best way when a tank can immediately overcome a water barrier along a tower, or when it is afraid of water, does a puddle in the MTO disable it?

      What is the best way — when he has the opportunity to break off horns in a city or mountains from bad people from the ZPU to unkind peasants, or when evil men can shoot a tank with impunity?

      If a person earnestly and stubbornly chooses the second part - religious faith, visual idiocy.

      By the way, the main reason for the appearance of the T-90, precisely, was to create a tank NOT WORSE than the T-64B. Caught up, and not for all the parameters, the car was discontinued in 1985. For example, they put the MSA, closed-loop control unit, etc.

      It is necessary to approach objectively, just that. But if an objective approach disturbs religious feelings, then the trouble is, of course.
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 30 July 2013 14: 21
        +3
        Quote: Gorchilin
        The question is not Mochilov, the question is the fervent religious faith of individual citizens in virtual phantoms.

        All your arguments will be interrupted by one single, T-90 in production.
        1. Kars
          Kars 30 July 2013 14: 29
          +2
          Quote: Setrac
          All your arguments will be interrupted by one single, T-90 in production

          And you do not have other varieties. UVZ is a monopolist.
          1. SerAll
            SerAll 30 July 2013 19: 04
            +2
            And do you have? or are you one naked in NATO ...?
            1. Kars
              Kars 30 July 2013 19: 35
              +1
              Quote: SerAll
              And do you have? or are you one naked in NATO ...?

              We have fewer requests.
      2. Rakti-kali
        Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 15: 16
        +4
        Quote: Gorchilin
        T-90, precisely, consisted in creating a tank NOT WELL THAN T-64B

        RAVE. The T-80 was already superior to the T-64 in everything, the T-72 was second only to them in the LMS (although this is debatable in the T-64), surpassing the reliability of the chassis, transmission and engine.
        1. Kars
          Kars 30 July 2013 15: 31
          +2
          Quote: Rakti-Kali
          RAVE.

          Yes, it’s just not nonsense. And the T-80 doesn’t need to be pulled in here. The Russian Federation and its modernization are cheryl. Looking for dubious cheapness.
          1. svp67
            svp67 30 July 2013 20: 47
            0
            And T64BV and where?
            1. Kars
              Kars 30 July 2013 21: 08
              +1
              Quote: Rakti-Kali
              although the T-64 is controversial

              mentioned.
        2. Gorchilin
          Gorchilin 30 July 2013 16: 45
          -4
          "Delirium" - well, rate your moronic comment on this scale: http://blog.i.ua/user/2661780/360143

          Once again, the T-80 did NOT outperform the T-64 in everything. In particular, the accuracy of the T-64B was higher. After the advent of the 6-cylinder T-64 engines, it caught up with the T-80 in terms of power.

          As for reliability, the tests of 1976-1978 clearly showed: the T-64 breaks less often than the T-72 and T-80, faults are eliminated there QUICKLY. This is the most reliable chassis.

          And yet, what does the T-80 have to do with it? This Ukraine can now produce the T-80. Russia prosrali Omsk plant and Leningrad KB. Remained Nizhny Tagil with the worst Soviet T-72 tank. Purely out of force gangster it was named T-90. The car did not become much better.

          The most obvious is that recently T-80 technical solutions are used there in separate nodes. This is certainly good, but this tank has been in production since 1976! Junk and archaism!
          1. Rakti-kali
            Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 18: 02
            +4
            Quote: Gorchilin
            Once again, the T-80 did NOT outperform the T-64 in everything. In particular, the accuracy of the T-64B was higher

            My dear, do not play with facts, or else tear it off, God forbid. Of course, the accuracy of the shooting of the T-64B of the 1976 model with the SUA 1A33 could exceed that of the T-80 arr of 1976 (with the SUA similar to the T-64A), but already in 1978 the eighty got the same 1A33 and was in no way inferior to the sixty-four Be. And the T-1B received a more advanced SLA (33A1-64) only in 1980.
            By the way, the T-72B has been produced with the 1985A1 MSA since 40, but the T-64B did not receive a new MSA. Strangely true ... After all, the T-64 "is much more promising and better than a sloppy seventy-two" ... tongue
            1. Gorchilin
              Gorchilin 30 July 2013 18: 41
              -7
              Yielding, and how. I repeat once again, the surprisingly light suspension of the T-64, with a minimum weight of moving parts, ensured high smoothness.

              Only due to the fact that heavy skating rinks did not jump, the accuracy of shooting on the move was already higher.

              Have you seen alloy wheels from cars? Do you understand why this is done?
              1. Rakti-kali
                Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 19: 16
                +4
                Quote: Gorchilin
                I repeat once again, the surprisingly light suspension of the T-64, with a minimum weight of moving parts, ensured high smoothness.

                Wrong accent. That's right - the surprisingly fragile chassis of the T-64, with a minimum margin of safety of the moving parts, did not provide either a smooth ride, an acceptable resource, or the possibility of sensible modernization.
                1. Gorchilin
                  Gorchilin 30 July 2013 19: 36
                  -8
                  The idiotic thesis!

                  The one-time T-64 is the most durable and most repairable of the Soviet naval tanks.

                  Behind this thesis is thousands of kilometers of tanks of all types, two years of testing.

                  The answer is clear and comprehensive.

                  And everything else is your stupid inventions!
                  1. svp67
                    svp67 30 July 2013 19: 42
                    +3
                    Quote: Gorchilin
                    The one-time T-64 is the most durable and most repairable of the Soviet naval tanks.
                    At the expense of the most durable, this is clearly too much - torsion bars "64" break more often than their counterparts on the T80 and T72, since being twice as short, they take more load, the T64 amartizers, as well as on the T80, are also "flimsy" T72 ... But what cannot be denied - it is really easier to repair, albeit more often, but easier ...
                  2. Rakti-kali
                    Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 20: 36
                    +2
                    Quote: Gorchilin
                    Another one-time T-64 is the most durable

                    Blessed are the believers ... Although you correctly wrote at the end about this: -
                    Quote: Gorchilin
                    then your stupid inventions!

                    Although the pronoun is still confused ... Or are you about yourself in the second person? But then it's to the doctors ...
                  3. Vereshagin
                    Vereshagin 30 July 2013 23: 31
                    +2
                    All that you posted - "Your stupid inventions" !!!
                    Do not write nonsense! The 64s have a weak chassis and the tests you refer to, corroborating the facts, have confirmed this.
                2. svp67
                  svp67 30 July 2013 19: 46
                  +2
                  Quote: Rakti-Kali
                  That's right - the surprisingly fragile running T-64, with a minimum margin of safety of the moving parts, did not provide a high ride, nor an acceptable resource, nor the possibility of sensible modernization.
                  the accent is really WRONG. The HC T64 completely provides everything - an acceptable resource, breakdowns, albeit more often than on other machines, but not pretentious and smoothness, it is softer than on the T72, but there is no need to talk about modernization - Bulat, T64E are clear proofs of this. So there is no need to "cast a shadow over the fence ..." especially since there is enough of it.
                  1. Rakti-kali
                    Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 20: 54
                    +1
                    Quote: svp67
                    T64 fully provides everything - and an acceptable resource, breakdowns, albeit more often than on other machines but not smooth and smoothness

                    And I do not dispute the fact that at the time of the appearance of the T-64 was really an outstanding machine. Just some (we won’t point a finger at anyone, although everyone knows that this is a baby elephant (s) trying to prove that he still surpasses everything that humanity could only invent in the field of tank building.
                    Quote: svp67
                    breakdowns, albeit more often than on other machines but not cretic

                    They were uncritical for the USSR, which had something to replace the failed sixty-four. Problems with engine reliability * (including operators) were solved on this tank for almost 10 years. The problems of running reliability (due to short torsion bars) have not been solved.
                    Quote: svp67
                    and smoothness, it is softer than on the T72

                    Yeah ... but only on the highway. At the intersection, the ride immediately disappears somewhere, especially when the shock absorbers overheat.
                    Quote: svp67
                    Well, there’s no need to talk about modernization here - Bulat, T64E

                    There are doubts. Both in the success of modernization, and in the capabilities of modernized machines.
                    Although the APU is an undoubted advantage.
                    Quote: svp67
                    So there is no need to "cast a shadow over the fence ..." especially since there is already enough of it

                    Not us like that - such a life (s)
              2. yanus
                yanus 30 July 2013 20: 16
                0
                Quote: Gorchilin
                Have you seen alloy wheels from cars? Do you understand why this is done?

                For Pontus, you’re eating. The lightness / severity of the wheels in cars does not affect smoothness at all.
                And in terms of the lightness / severity of the rollers - well, look through the school physics textbook, refresh the concepts of "inertia", "mass". Compare the mass of the tank and the mass of the rollers, enlightenment may come.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 30 July 2013 20: 43
                  0
                  Quote: yanus
                  The lightness / severity of the wheels in cars does not affect the smoothness of the ride at all.
                  Well ... Well, how does it affect, including cost-effectiveness
            2. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 2 August 2013 21: 07
              +1
              Quote: Rakti-Kali
              Of course, the accuracy of the shooting of the T-64B of the 1976 model with the SUA 1A33 could exceed that of the T-80 arr of 1976 (with the SUA similar to the T-64A), but already in 1978 the eighty got the same 1A33 and was in no way inferior to the sixty-four Be. And the T-1B received a more advanced SLA (33A1-64) only in 1980.
              By the way, the T-72B has been produced with the 1985A1 MSA since 40, but the T-64B did not receive a new MSA. Strangely true ... After all, the T-64 "is much more promising and better than a sloppy seventy-two" ... tongue

              Incidentally,
              when they say that T-64 and T-80 were superior to the T-72 tank in terms of the SLA, why is it not mentioned that the SLAs were developed not by tank manufacturers, but by a separate enterprise. In particular, the Chelyabinsk Design Bureau "Rotor" was engaged in tank electronics, which made the LMS for All Allied tanks, and the tank factory was engaged in the pure adaptation (layout) of their products to fit their product. Which SLA to put on a particular tank, the decision was made at the top, and it was purely political. Blaming the lack of a quality (expensive) SLA to the manufacturers of the T-72 tank is not very correct, since this is not their cant.
      3. PLO
        PLO 30 July 2013 16: 06
        +6

        What is the best way when a tank has more or less shells in MZ / AZ?

        better when there are enough shells, and even if the dimensions of the AZ / MZ are taken into account, then the advantage is clearly not in the latter

        What is the best way when he has a full-fledged SLA, or instead of it, primitive sights?

        you are talking nonsense
        The LMS on the T-90A (not to mention the T-90MS) surpasses the Omsk Strongholds, not to mention the ancient T-64B, whose LMS incidentally did not exceed the T-72B

        What is the best way — when he has the opportunity to break off horns in a city or mountains from bad people from the ZPU to unkind peasants, or when evil men can shoot a tank with impunity?

        perhaps the only advantage of the former T-64B is this remotely controlled ZPU, however on the T-72 it was not for completely different reasons


        By the way, the main reason for the appearance of the T-90, precisely, was to create a tank NOT Worse than the T-64Б.

        delirium
        1. Kars
          Kars 30 July 2013 16: 11
          +1
          Quote: olp
          By the way, the main reason for the appearance of the T-90, precisely, was to create a tank NOT Worse than the T-64Б.
          delirium
          1. PLO
            PLO 30 July 2013 16: 38
            +1
            and where is the T-64B here?
            the fact that under the collapse of the Union the most modern tank was the T-80 was beyond doubt, only the T-64B was in exactly the same position as the T-72B.
            1. Kars
              Kars 30 July 2013 17: 04
              +2
              Quote: olp
              and where is the T-64B here?

              Quote: olp
              By the way, the main point the appearance of the T-90, just, was to create a tank NOT WELL THAN T-64B.
              delirium

              Quote: olp
              the modern tank was the T-80, no doubt

              The decision to refuse to continue its modifications in favor of the T-72 is doubtful
              90
              Quote: olp
              only the T-64B was in exactly the same position as the T-72B

              And this did not bother anyone, the T-64 was discontinued in favor of the T-80UD
              1. PLO
                PLO 30 July 2013 17: 22
                +4
                and why so many quotes? mention of the T-64B in this article will still not appear.

                The decision to refuse to continue its modifications in favor of the T-72/90 is doubtful.

                lobbyists, lobbyists, all around lobbyists alone ...
                this does not become a bad T-72 tank
                GTE is clearly cooler than diesel, but also much more expensive

                And this did not bother anyone, the T-64 was discontinued in favor of the T-80UD

                even as worries. Comrade Gorchilin still can not calm down.
                T-72BU was created to surpass the T-80, and not the sunken T-64B
                1. Gorchilin
                  Gorchilin 30 July 2013 17: 41
                  -1
                  To expand your horizons, no one has sunk into oblivion. Kharkovites offer two tanks, damask steel and stronghold. This is the development of the T-64 and T-80, they are equipped with modern equipment, the protection is enhanced, very powerful engines are installed.

                  As for me, the T-64 is better for a number of reasons, the only comment is that the chassis does not like high speeds. Well, tanks are created for other conditions.

                  That is, the release of the T-64 is discontinued, but in terms of modernization it is available. This is a very good option, a completely modern tank is obtained literally for ridiculous money.
                  1. PLO
                    PLO 30 July 2013 17: 50
                    +4
                    To expand your horizons, no one has sunk into oblivion. Kharkovites offer two tanks, damask steel and stronghold. This is the development of the T-64 and T-80, they are equipped with modern equipment, enhanced protection, very powerful engines are installed

                    even as he sank. the production of this flawed tank was curtailed in the USSR.

                    As for me, the T-64 is better for a number of reasons, the only comment is that the chassis does not like high speeds. Well, tanks are created for other conditions.

                    T-64 was worse than T-80UD in everything


                    That is, the release of the T-64 is discontinued, but in terms of modernization it is available. This is a very good option, a completely modern tank is obtained literally for ridiculous money.

                    you made me laugh again, especially about ridiculous money.
                    and who only now doesn’t offer modernization to all post-war tanks
                    1. Gorchilin
                      Gorchilin 30 July 2013 18: 31
                      -3
                      Once again, it was an advanced tank, a tank that laid the foundations of tank building for decades to come! These technical solutions were copied as best they could.

                      Collapsed - everything went to standardization. The T-80 was recognized as a kind of standard; it began to be produced at two plants with different engines. And that was the mind.

                      According to TTX, the T-64B of the latest releases did not differ much from the T-80UD1. Twin brothers. For certain moments (throughput), the T-64B is better.

                      That growl as much as you like, who doesn’t give you ..
                      1. Rakti-kali
                        Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 19: 19
                        +2
                        Quote: Gorchilin
                        Once again, it was an advanced tank, a tank that laid the foundations of tank building for decades to come!

                        And here I am absolutely in solidarity with you! It is truly an advanced tank. WAS.
                      2. Gorchilin
                        Gorchilin 30 July 2013 19: 39
                        -5
                        Nonsense, this machine is still in service today, in thousands.

                        And today, these technical solutions are replicated by many factories. For example, Nizhny Tagil. True, the T-64 lenigraders improved, and Nizhny Tagil pocher as he could, made a freak
                      3. Rakti-kali
                        Rakti-kali 31 July 2013 01: 14
                        +2
                        Quote: Gorchilin
                        Nonsense, this machine is still in service today, in thousands.

                        WHERE???
                        According to the "White Book of Ukraine 2012", the Ground Forces of Ukraine were armed with 686 tanks, and the Ukrainian Navy - 41 tanks.
            2. Kars
              Kars 30 July 2013 17: 48
              +3
              Quote: olp
              The T-64B will not appear in this article anyway.

              But there is a story of the T-90
              Quote: olp
              this does not become a bad T-72 tank

              it remains worse than the T-80
              Quote: olp
              T-72BU was created to surpass the T-80, and not the sunken T-64B

              How could he sink into oblivion when he was not taken out of service? So, you wishful thinking.

              Plural
              1. PLO
                PLO 30 July 2013 18: 11
                -1
                But there is a story of the T-90

                I noticed


                it remains worse than the T-80

                if you take exactly the T-72, then for a long time there is no taking into account the T-72B2 / B3

                How could he sink into oblivion when he was not taken out of service? So, you wishful thinking.

                like that. they will finish the last T-64s in Ukraine soon and they will forget about it as a nightmare.

                Plural

                with your literacy about plural the number was not worth mentioning

                ..that the T-72BM was inferior in terms of firepower domestic and western samples..

                ask the teacher of the Russian language whether it is possible to write in this sentence domesticavoiding tongue-tied tongue.
                this turn of speech absolutely does not state that T-64B was among these samples
                1. Kars
                  Kars 30 July 2013 18: 34
                  +1
                  Quote: olp
                  I noticed

                  Is it really
                  Quote: olp
                  if you take exactly the T-72, then for a long time there is no taking into account the T-72B2 / B3

                  How long has it been? And better than the T-80? T-80U T-80 Bars? And those upgrades that could be?
                  Quote: olp
                  from so on. they will finish the last T-64s in Ukraine soon and they will forget about it as a nightmare.

                  So far, they have not begun to saw, but only sawed.
                  Quote: olp
                  .that the T-72BM was inferior in terms of firepower to domestic and western models

                  Of course, this is not a plural to domestic ones. How would you write without specifying the modifications that were inferior to the T-80 and T-64 tanks (foreign ones also did not paint the network)
                  1. PLO
                    PLO 30 July 2013 18: 50
                    +1
                    Is it really

                    I tell you exactly

                    How long has it been? And better than the T-80? T-80U T-80 Bars? And those upgrades that could be?

                    it's a long time. and taking into account those modifications that could have been ..

                    So far, they have not begun to saw, but only sawed.

                    so far they’re not sawing much. nobody needs just.


                    Of course, this is not a plural to domestic ones. How would you write without specifying the modifications that were inferior to the T-80 and T-64 tanks (foreign ones also did not paint the network)

                    that’s because they didn’t write to whom exactly, therefore they indicated such a general phrase without going into specifics.
                    and taking into account the fact that it is known that the T-72B was not inferior to the T-64B, we can conclude that the T-64B in the article did not mean.
                  2. svp67
                    svp67 30 July 2013 18: 56
                    +1
                    Quote: olp
                    that T-72Б was not inferior to T-64Б

                    The SLM72B is worse than that of the T64B, so it was inferior ...
                  3. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 19: 17
                    +2
                    Quote: olp
                    I tell you exactly

                    oh well, you are kidding me.
                    Quote: olp
                    it's a long time

                    BC? After the birth of Christ?

                    Quote: olp
                    and taking into account those modifications that could have been.

                    So they are)) T-90A
                    Quote: olp
                    so far they’re not sawing much. nobody needs just.

                    The Armed Forces of Ukraine have already taken almost 100 Bulat.

                    Quote: olp
                    and taking into account the fact that the T-72B is not inferior to the T-64B,

                    Quote: svp67
                    The T72B control system is worse than the T64B, so it was inferior ..

                    We have a SVP tanker, maybe he didn’t see the abrams, or Stronghold and knows the old Soviet tanks.
                  4. PLO
                    PLO 30 July 2013 19: 48
                    +3
                    oh well, you are kidding me.
                    \
                    what if I don’t play?

                    BC? After the birth of Christ?

                    AD, after the birth of Christ.

                    So they are)) T-90A

                    and is that not enough?

                    The Armed Forces of Ukraine have already taken almost 100 Bulat.

                    there are no other options for them.
                    to others and for nothing is not needed

                    We have a SVP tanker, maybe he didn’t see the abrams, or Stronghold and knows the old Soviet tanks.

                    in part, the CCF was slightly better, the wind sensor was.
                    Remnants of Soviet specialization remained.
                    but compared with the notorious T-72A with which the T-64B was compared, the difference was minimal.
                    The T-72BU proved very well that the T-72 base was superior to the T-64
                  5. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 20: 12
                    +1
                    Quote: olp
                    what if I don’t play?

                    you will become.
                    Quote: olp
                    AD, after the birth of Christ.

                    Renaissance? Manufactory period?
                    Quote: olp
                    and is that not enough?

                    Spending 20 years to surpass the T-80U can certainly be enough for you.
                    Quote: olp
                    there are no other options for them.
                    to others and for nothing is not needed

                    For nothing? Have you checked?

                    Quote: olp
                    The T-72BU proved very well that the T-72 base was superior to the T-64

                    Are you into fantasy again? Can you give more details?
                    Quote: olp
                    but compared with the notorious T-72A with which the T-64B was compared, the difference was minimal.
                    You hike from parallel reality
                  6. PLO
                    PLO 30 July 2013 20: 35
                    0
                    you will become.

                    you see

                    Renaissance? Manufactory period?

                    somewhat later


                    Spending 20 years to surpass the T-80U can certainly be enough for you.

                    and what does the extended term have to do with it?

                    For nothing? Have you checked?

                    of course

                    Are you into fantasy again? Can you give more details?

                    anything for you.
                    as soon as the need arose to equip the T-72 with modern systems, this was done.

                    You hike from parallel reality

                    then you also get out of parallel reality? lol
                  7. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 20: 43
                    +1
                    Quote: olp
                    you see

                    Yes you are.
                    Quote: olp
                    somewhat later

                    you do not know the campaign

                    Quote: olp
                    and what does the extended term have to do with it?

                    despite the fact that the tank industry of Russia trampled on the spot for 20 years. Because of an erroneous decision to allocate resources to pull the T-72. instead of continuing to improve the T-80U
                    Quote: olp
                    of course
                    lying.

                    Quote: olp
                    as soon as the need arose to equip the T-72 with modern systems, this was done.

                    Yes, and OCD spent a lot of money on this. It would be better to improve the T-80U.

                    Quote: olp
                    then you also get out of parallel reality?

                    no, I only communicate with the representative of parallel reality.
                  8. PLO
                    PLO 30 July 2013 20: 53
                    +1
                    Yes you are.

                    Thanks for your kind words

                    you do not know the campaign

                    I know.

                    despite the fact that the tank industry of Russia trampled on the spot for 20 years. Because of an erroneous decision to allocate resources to pull the T-72. instead of continuing to improve the T-80U

                    tank construction of the Russian Federation appeared in the 91st year.
                    T-90A in the 2006th year.
                    20 years in no way.
                    object 187 showed that no one was marking time.
                    and before the tanks, was the freshly baked arm of the Russian Federation a completely different question.

                    lying.

                    How do you know?

                    Yes, and OCD spent a lot of money on this. It would be better to improve the T-80U.

                    it is possible that it would be better if the T-80s were improved, but this does not make the T-72 a bad tank

                    no, I only communicate with the representative of parallel reality.

                    if you seriously think that you are communicating with a representative of parallel reality, you need to urgently go to the hospital
                  9. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 21: 07
                    +1
                    Quote: olp
                    Thanks for your kind words

                    Well, you need something to support you. It's hard to live like that.
                    Quote: olp
                    I know.

                    would be in the know would write an answer, but all that was enough for you
                    Quote: olp
                    it's a long time


                    Quote: olp
                    tank construction of the Russian Federation appeared in the 91st year

                    The tank building of Russia as well as Ukraine appeared under the USSR.
                    Quote: olp
                    T-90A in 2006
                    but count from the appearance of the T-80U

                    Quote: olp
                    and before the tanks was the freshly baked hands of the Russian Federation a completely different question
                    That is why they were mistaken, and you still sip it.

                    Quote: olp
                    it’s completely possible that the T-80s would be better, but that doesn’t make the T-72 a bad tank

                    This leaves him a tank worse than the T-80.
                    Quote: olp
                    if you seriously think that you are communicating with a representative of parallel reality, you need to urgently go to the hospital

                    Yes, I already see that you have been taken to the Internet in the balneica.
                  10. PLO
                    PLO 30 July 2013 21: 23
                    0
                    Well, you need something to support you. It's hard to live like that.

                    personal experience?

                    would be in the know would write an answer, but all that was enough for you

                    I wrote everything you need, if you do not need a constructive conversation, these are your problems

                    The tank building of Russia as well as Ukraine appeared under the USSR.

                    They began to pursue their own policies in the 910th, and previously everything was under the leadership of the party, and if it was marking time it means it was necessary.

                    but count from the appearance of the T-80U

                    why should I count from the appearance of the T-80U?
                    can count from the appearance of the T-64A?

                    That is why they were mistaken, and you still sip it.

                    if yes if yes mushrooms grew in the mouth ..
                    this mistake is only in your sick imagination
                    the fact that in Chechnya the T-72 showed itself better than I think it was no accident.

                    Yes, I already see that you have been taken to the Internet in the balneica.

                    What chamber are you in? 6th? maybe I’ll come. I will bring fruit
                  11. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 21: 32
                    +1
                    Quote: olp
                    personal experience?

                    read on the internet
                    Quote: olp
                    I wrote everything you need, if you do not need a constructive conversation, these are your problems

                    you could not answer - and all that was enough to say to you, a long time ago.
                    Quote: olp
                    They began to pursue their own policies in the 910th, and previously everything was under the leadership of the party, and if it was marking time it means it was necessary.

                    T-80U and UD were produced and were to become the main tank of the Soviet army.
                    Quote: olp
                    why should I count from the appearance of the T-80U?
                    can count from the appearance of the T-64A?

                    I gave you a head start. and the T-80u appeared later than the T-64a, so it’s better to count from it. otherwise you can start from Renault ft-17
                    Quote: olp
                    the fact that in Chechnya the T-72 showed itself better than I think it was no accident.

                    this is not true.
                    In Chechnya, the T-80BV - demonstrated the ability to withstand up to five hits (or even more) of anti-tank grenades, without losing combat effectiveness (even with empty KDZ blocks).

                    My subjective opinion is that the T-80BV proved to be a more reliable machine than the T-72. At the railway station of six T-80BV tanks NN180,185,187,189 (715), 174,176 - irreparable losses amounted to only one tank - N174. Two tanks NN185,187 - went under their own power on pl. Ordzhonikidze as a result of a breakthrough. N176 - until the end it is unclear who knocked him out? All equipment was on the same line of defense with 131 Motorized Rifle Brigades.

                    Speaking about the shortcomings of the T-80BV, I want to emphasize that they relate to the period January 1995. and specifically to the T-80BV, subsequently they were taken into account - tanks were modified accordingly. - Weak protection of the sides of the tank. Due to the loading mechanism of its design features, the rollers do not cover the warhead (MZ conveyor) - unlike the T-72, where the AZ is covered by rollers;

                    http://artofwar.ru/w/wechkanow_i_w/text_0020.shtml
                    Quote: olp
                    which chamber are you in? 6th? maybe I’ll come. I will bring fruit

                    So you are definitely in the hospital, otherwise you would ask the address, not the ward))
                  12. PLO
                    PLO 30 July 2013 21: 46
                    0
                    read on the internet

                    why read? So still there were personal problems?

                    you could not answer - and all that was enough to say to you, a long time ago.

                    what is the question is the answer.
                    about all the modernization that could have been not I started.

                    My subjective opinion

                    that says it all. there were many opposing opinions.

                    So you are definitely in the hospital, otherwise you would ask the address, not the ward))

                    yeah .. so you still didn’t pay attention to it in the ward
                  13. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 21: 55
                    +1
                    Quote: olp
                    why read?

                    Yes, you started about the complexes, I had to look at the mat part. Like with such a contingent of community.
                    Quote: olp
                    what is the question is the answer

                    Quote: Kars
                    if you take exactly the T-72, then for a long time there is no taking into account the T-72B2 / B3
                    How long?

                    It was a question for your statement. But you still couldn’t answer.
                    T-72B2 (Object 184M - aka T-72BM, T-72B2 according to various documents) "Slingshot" - a modernized gun 2A46M5 was installed on the tank, which increased the accuracy of fire, a device was also installed to increase the accuracy of firing artillery weapons, multi-channel (sighting, rangefinder , thermal imaging channels and a channel combined with them for guided missile guidance) the gunner's sight "Sosna", manufactured by the Belarusian OJSC "Peleng", is equipped with a second-generation thermal imaging camera of the French CATHERINE company Thomson-CSF, the tank is equipped with dynamic protection of the modular type "Relikt", a new the V-92S2 engine with a capacity of 1000 hp, in addition, the tank is equipped with an auxiliary (APU), the tank is equipped with an electromagnetic protection system that provides protection against anti-tank mines with magnetic fuses. Demonstrated only once at an exhibition in Nizhny Tagil in 2006,

                    This is of course a very long time.
                    Quote: olp
                    about all the modernization that could have been not I started.

                    and this generally did not apply to the question of B2 / B3.
                    Quote: olp
                    that says it all. there were many opposing opinions.
                    give the opposite.
                    With an explicit comparison.

                    Quote: olp
                    yeah .. so you still didn’t pay attention to it in the ward
                    No, I didn’t ask you for either an address or a palut. Therefore, I drew attention to your reaction to the assumption (which was confirmed by the tere) that you were connected to the Internet in a madhouse.
                  14. PLO
                    PLO 30 July 2013 22: 19
                    0
                    Yes, you started about the complexes, I had to look at the mat part. Like with such a contingent of community.

                    if you read the materiel a little further you would understand that this is a typical otmaza of such a contingent, i.e. you)

                    This is of course a very long time.

                    then you still knew the answer, and the information that I provided was enough to understand.
                    and you mean have gone unconscious. not good. I would even say ashamed.

                    give the opposite.
                    With an explicit comparison.

                    http://otvaga2004.ru/tanki/tanki-concept/sravnenie-t64-t80-t72/

                    Objectively and soberly assessing whose fighting vehicle is better: the Russian T-72 and T-80 or the Ukrainian T-64, it must be recognized that the T-72 is most adapted to the conditions in which it was operated and fought.


                    No, I didn’t ask you for either an address or a palut. Therefore, I drew attention to your reaction to the assumption (which was confirmed by the tere) that you were connected to the Internet in a madhouse.

                    No, I asked about the ward, to check whether you ask about it, but as usual, you didn’t understand anything.
                    and mean my assumption was confirmed.
                    What did you think?
                  15. Kars
                    Kars 30 July 2013 23: 24
                    +1
                    Quote: olp
                    if you read the materiel a little further you would understand that this is a typical otmaza of such a contingent, i.e. you

                    Well, I don’t know about the complexes you first started, probably you know better.
                    Quote: olp
                    then you still knew the answer, and the information that I provided was enough to understand.
                    and you mean have gone unconscious. not good. I would even say ashamed

                    I knew, but you didn’t. And laughed to the fullest. Although of course you can assume that 2006 is a long time ago.
                    Quote: olp
                    http://otvaga2004.ru/tanki/tanki-concept/sravnenie-t64-t80-t72/

                    this is nonsense, whose author was laughed at on this site. By the way, it is also posted. And can I give a specific quote about Chechnya?
                    Quote: olp
                    no, I asked about the ward to check
                    yes of course, tell me further durik.
                  16. PLO
                    PLO 30 July 2013 23: 42
                    0
                    Well, I don’t know about the complexes you first started, probably you know better.

                    exactly, I know better

                    I knew, but you didn’t. And laughed to the fullest. Although of course you can assume that 2006 is a long time ago.

                    yeah, you knew, but no one else knew.
                    when you started talking about what no one saw the MSA in the T-90MS.
                    clown

                    this is nonsense, whose author was laughed at on this site. By the way, it is also posted. And can I give a specific quote about Chechnya?

                    I have already quoted you. just show a little quick wit and everything will fall into place

                    this is nonsense, whose author was laughed at on this site. By the way, it is also posted. And can I give a specific quote about Chechnya?

                    I don’t have to evaluate the level of the author, you asked for a different opinion, you got it.

                    yes of course, tell me further durik.

                    don't be nervous clown
                  17. Kars
                    Kars 31 July 2013 00: 02
                    +1
                    Quote: olp
                    I know better

                    naturally your kompleks, your problems.
                    Quote: olp
                    yeah, you knew, but no one else knew.

                    you are not.
                    Quote: olp
                    when you started talking about what no one saw the MSA in the T-90MS.

                    They could have seen it, but its quality was very vryatli who could.
                    Quote: olp
                    I have already quoted you.
                    You did not quote Chechnya and compare.

                    Quote: olp
                    just show a little quick wit and everything will fall into place

                    this was done when the article was ridiculed,
                    Quote: olp
                    not for me to evaluate the level of the author, you asked for a different opinion, you got it
                    I asked in Chechnya. You kept saying that the T-72 was the best in Chechnya.

                    Quote: olp
                    don't be nervous clown

                    as you say. durik. psihichicheskie not better not touch. About sin away.
                  18. PLO
                    PLO 31 July 2013 00: 22
                    0
                    naturally your kompleks, your problems.

                    you, as usual, misunderstood everything.
                    your complexes. problems too. and just to me your complexes and problems from the side are very clearly visible. remember and next time make no mistake
                    you are not.

                    i am yes

                    They could have seen it, but its quality was very vryatli who could.

                    you fantasize again

                    You did not quote Chechnya and compare.

                    I gave you a quote mentioning all the fighting.

                    this was done when the article was ridiculed,

                    about ridicule it seemed to you again


                    as you say. durik. psihichicheskie not better not touch. About sin away.

                    it’s better not to touch the mental ones. nervous clown psychos are very dangerous
                  19. Kars
                    Kars 31 July 2013 00: 39
                    +1
                    Quote: olp
                    your complexes

                    Calm down everything already and so about your complexes have learned, you can poland not otpiratsa.
                    Quote: olp
                    i am yes

                    Yeah, I knew - LAST it was)))
                    Quote: olp
                    you fantasize again
                    why. if there are no orders for MS. he was taken to India. to the most loyal customers of the T-90.

                    Quote: olp
                    I gave you a quote mentioning all the fighting.
                    It’s all smeared. Together, they fought only in Chechnya, and the Antipas never fought at all.

                    Quote: olp
                    ridicule it seems to you again


                    Comparison of T-64, T-80 and T-72 tanks (from personal experience)
                    December 15, 2011

                    you can read.

                    Quote: olp
                    it’s better not to touch the mental ones. nervous clown psychos are very dangerous

                    That's just not necessary to threaten.
                  20. PLO
                    PLO 31 July 2013 00: 52
                    0
                    Calm down everything already and so about your complexes have learned, you can poland not otpiratsa.

                    are all your imaginary friends?)
                    it's funny.

                    why. if there are no orders for MS. he was taken to India. to the most loyal customers of the T-90.

                    and why orders for the MS, if the T-90S are going well. here, after all, who is more suitable for whom.

                    It’s all smeared. Together, they fought only in Chechnya, and the Antipas never fought at all.

                    Well, is he even a tanker?)
                    in any case, the fact that the second Chechen company T-80 was no longer used speaks volumes.

                    That's just not necessary to threaten

                    What are you? threaten a psycho clown? God forbid.
  • family tree
    family tree 30 July 2013 23: 30
    +3
    Quote: olp
    tank construction of the Russian Federation appeared in the 91st year.

    P (C) F (CP) and? Our your Koshkin, to Kharkov, on a steam locomotive, was sent from St. Petersburg, among other things yes
  • svp67
    svp67 30 July 2013 20: 46
    0
    Quote: Gorchilin
    By the way, the main reason for the appearance of the T-90, precisely, was to create a tank NOT Worse than the T-64Б.
    Bullshit - T90 Nizhny Tagil analogue T80U
    1. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 2 August 2013 21: 31
      0
      Quote: svp67
      Quote: Gorchilin
      By the way, the main reason for the appearance of the T-90, precisely, was to create a tank NOT Worse than the T-64Б.
      Bullshit - T90 Nizhny Tagil analogue T80U

      I do not agree. Of course, after the collapse of the union, with a sharp reduction in the flow of money into the defense industry, it was not rational to leave the release of two tanks similar in characteristics. And the price difference between the T-72 and T-80 was 2,5 times. Left in production a cheaper option. By the way, the promising object 187, which claimed to become the T-90, was also rejected for the same reason (at a price it was almost like the T-80). Therefore, the T-90 comes from the T-72, although, in the future, many elements of the 187th (in particular, the tower) were installed on it.
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 3 August 2013 10: 09
        0
        Quote: Bad_gr
        I do not agree.

        I apologize, I misunderstood the statement (I realized that the T-90 is a further development of the T-80) and therefore wrote "I disagree." In the above message, this phrase is superfluous.
        1. svp67
          svp67 3 August 2013 18: 53
          +1
          Quote: Bad_gr
          I'm sorry

          Accepted, but I already wanted to be outraged ... drinks
  • SOZIN2013
    SOZIN2013 30 July 2013 13: 20
    +5
    Regarding the fact that the Arena does not protect the tank on approaching missiles at a miss, that is, from above! Where does such data come from ??? Judging because I know, and according to the designers, the Arena protects the tank within -270 +270 degrees, as well as protection in the upper part of the hull, that is, the tower! That provides an incomparable survivability of the tank, in comparison with Western counterparts, on the battlefield !!!
    1. Gorchilin
      Gorchilin 30 July 2013 16: 48
      -3
      Once again, Arena is a rather stupid decision. For several reasons.

      1. It is dangerous, it will work, it will ruin its own people nearby. Not applicable in difficult conditions;

      2. Its signal is an excellent beacon for enemy anti-tank weapons;

      3. It is easy to manage with a number of systems, starting with multi-barrel grenade launchers (RPG-30) and electronic warfare equipment.

      An expensive, dangerous and worthless toy
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 30 July 2013 17: 07
        +5
        The arena is dangerous. But only in case of misuse. "Barrier" is dangerous in any case, it does not provide for the presence of infantry on the battlefield at all.
        1. Kars
          Kars 30 July 2013 17: 15
          +2
          Quote: Spade
          But only in case of misuse. "Barrier" is dangerous in any case, it does not provide for the presence of infantry on the battlefield at all.


          And more?
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 30 July 2013 17: 27
            +5
            Like already discussed. The "Barrier" ammunition is essentially a horizontally mounted OZM-72. Mowing down all the infantry that was not in the shadow of the tank. And "Arena" is analogous to MON-500, and is dangerous only for those who find themselves where the infantry should not be.
            1. Kars
              Kars 30 July 2013 17: 33
              +1
              Quote: Spade
              Like already discussed. The "Barrier" ammunition is essentially a horizontally mounted OZM-72. Mowing down all the infantry that was not in the shadow of the tank. And "Arena" is an analogue of MON-500, and is dangerous only for those who find themselves where the infantry should not be

              Is he coughing right?

              http://fcct-microtek.com/c_zaslon_ru.html

              how many hundred meters?

              And where do you think there should be no infantry? Sorry, the approach of anti-tank ammunition is not predictable.

              So you are confusing something and very much. Although the campaign you are going to carry infantry on the armor of a tank. And it will not be beaten when the combat unit is shot?
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 30 July 2013 17: 45
                +3
                Quote: Kars
                how many hundred meters?

                The infantry does not support the tank hundreds of meters from it. Half of the infantry squad will be cut out by rail.

                Quote: Kars
                And where do you think there should be no infantry? Sorry, the approach of anti-tank ammunition is not predictable.

                She should not be in front of the tank.


                Quote: Kars
                .Although the campaign you are going to infantry on a tank armor to carry

                An interesting method. Or maybe you let me think for yourself?
                1. Kars
                  Kars 30 July 2013 17: 51
                  +1
                  Quote: Spade
                  Half of the infantry squad will be cut out by rail

                  How many meters from the tank are you planning to deploy an infantry compartment from the tank? At 2? 5?
                  Quote: Spade
                  She should not be in front of the tank.

                  And from the side they no longer shoot at the tank? And is it really that the Arena has such a narrow defense sector? Only from the front))))))
                  Quote: Spade
                  Or maybe you let me think for yourself?

                  Well, you are not trying))
                  1. Lopatov
                    Lopatov 30 July 2013 18: 03
                    +3
                    Quote: Kars
                    How many meters from the tank are you planning to deploy an infantry compartment from the tank? At 2? 5?

                    Up to 100 m. That is, at that distance at which high-speed fragments capable of deflecting BOPS can kill.

                    Quote: Kars
                    And from the side they no longer shoot at the tank? And is it really that the Arena has such a narrow defense sector? Only from the front))))))

                    Do you have any idea of ​​"safe maneuvering angles"? Well, the use of "Arena" within them is always safe for the infantry. "Barrier" - only in certain cases
                    1. Kars
                      Kars 30 July 2013 18: 38
                      +1
                      Quote: Spade
                      Up to 100 m. That is, at that distance at which high-speed fragments capable of deflecting BOPS can kill.

                      where did you get this, especially considering that the expansion of the fragments of the combat element of the KAZ barrier has a pie chart perpendicular to the plane of the earth.
                      Quote: Spade
                      Do you have any idea about "safe maneuvering angles"? Well, the use of "Arena" within them is always safe for the infantry

                      you write nonsense. and safe maneuvering angles are not related to infantry but are related to booking.

                      Today you amaze me again))) as recently. Write such nonsense.

                      Actual and technical characteristics of KAZ "Arena" [edit]

                      Range of speeds of the hit targets: 70-700 m / s
                      Azimuth Protection Sector: 270 °
                      1. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 30 July 2013 18: 47
                        +3
                        Quote: Kars
                        where did you get this, especially considering that the expansion of the fragments of the combat element of the KAZ barrier has a pie chart perpendicular to the plane of the earth.

                        I say: OZM-75, located parallel to the ground. With all the consequences.


                        Quote: Kars
                        you write nonsense. and safe maneuvering angles are not related to infantry but are related to booking.

                        It’s not me writing nonsense, you don’t know how to read it.
                        Once again: the use of "Arena" within safe maneuvering corners for tanks is always safe for infantry. "Barrier" - only in certain cases
                        Is that clearer? There are safe maneuvering angles. Tanks, not infantry. The use of KAZ "Arena" within these corners is always safe for their infantry.
                      2. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 19: 19
                        +1
                        Quote: Spade
                        I say: OZM-75, located parallel to the ground. With all the consequences.

                        What are the consequences?
                        Quote: Spade
                        Once again: the use of "Arena" within the corners of safe maneuvering for tanks is always safe for infantry

                        This is nonsense, nonsense nonsense.
                        Let’s where did you get this)))
                        Quote: Spade
                        There are safe maneuvering angles.

                        Tell us in detail what it is, given that
                        Quote: Kars
                        Range of speeds of the hit targets: 70-700 m / s
                        Azimuth Protection Sector: 270 °


                        Let's get on the fingers? A)))
                      3. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 30 July 2013 19: 48
                        0
                        I specially drew a little diagram for you below. Nowhere is easier.
                      4. Kars
                        Kars 30 July 2013 20: 13
                        +1
                        Quote: Spade
                        Below you specially painted a little diagram. Nowhere is easier.

                        Resource.
              2. Kars
                Kars 30 July 2013 18: 39
                +1
                ______________
                1. Kars
                  Kars 30 July 2013 18: 43
                  +1
                  Then I schematically indicated in black rectangles the danger zone of the Barrier.
                2. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 30 July 2013 19: 13
                  +1
                  Bad view. It's better this way:
                3. Kars
                  Kars 30 July 2013 19: 38
                  +1
                  Such a small ammunition and you knock out such a ploshchad)))) You flatter the Barrier)))
                  And yes, of course, in the explosion at the Arena, well, nothing flies in the opposite direction. We directly refuted the laws of Newton.
                4. Kars
                  Kars 30 July 2013 19: 43
                  +1
                  _________________
                  The barrel is certainly a pity. But vryatli it will be damaged very seriously. And the heat-insulating covers can be repaired.
                5. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 30 July 2013 20: 01
                  0
                  Top is generally cool. It will be dangerous in the sector of 360 degrees.
                6. The comment was deleted.
            2. Lopatov
              Lopatov 30 July 2013 20: 00
              0
              I drew sectors. And about the "small" one - I did not mention OZM-74 as an example. She is just as small. And the "Barrier" ammunition and ready-made fragments are larger, and their speed is much higher. Otherwise they would not have the energy to deflect BOPS
            3. Kars
              Kars 30 July 2013 20: 05
              +1
              Quote: Spade
              I drew sectors

              Wrong. And where is the maneuvering visible there? You hike the term completely.
              Quote: Spade
              And about the "small" - I did not mention OZM-74 as an example

              in vain
              Quote: Spade
              And the "Barrier" ammunition and ready-made fragments are larger, and their speed is much higher. Otherwise, they would not have the energy to deflect BOPS
              hence the path is straighter.

              Quote: Spade
              Top is generally cool. It will be dangerous in the sector of 360 degrees.

              Well, as the foot soldiers become 3 meters tall, so right away.

              By the way, F-1 (grana) is also considered dangerous for 200 meters. But this is not entirely true. Look, it will be interesting for you)))
            4. yanus
              yanus 30 July 2013 20: 26
              +1
              Quote: Kars
              Well, as the foot soldiers become 3 meters tall, so right away.

              The infantrymen may not be steamed, but the second tank standing next to it will receive all this trifle just in optics on the tower, antennas, etc.
            5. Lopatov
              Lopatov 30 July 2013 22: 13
              0
              Quote: Kars
              Wrong. And where is the maneuvering visible there? You hike the term completely.

              I drew sectors for the expansion of fragments. If you do not understand this, then discussing with you is generally useless.

              Quote: Kars
              And the "Barrier" ammunition and ready-made fragments are larger, and their speed is much higher. Otherwise, they would not have the energy to deflect BOPS

              hence the path is straighter.















              Quote: Kars
              Well, as the foot soldiers become 3 meters tall, so right away.

              Do you need to draw another little scheme?
            6. Kars
              Kars 30 July 2013 23: 28
              +1
              Quote: Spade
              I drew sectors for the expansion of fragments

              You painted nonsense.
              Quote: Spade
              If you do not understand this, then discussing with you is generally useless.

              Well, yes, with a man telling about safe angles, maneuvering with the KAZ sector of 270 degrees ((
              Quote: Spade
              Do you need to draw another little scheme?

              You at least draw one more correctly. Write down the killer radius of the expansion of the fragments. Complete defeat. The trajectory and speed when a fragment from a height of three meters descends to 1.8 meters.

              And it is also advisable to bring something from third-party sources and not your thoughts.
      2. yanus
        yanus 30 July 2013 20: 24
        +1
        Quote: Kars
        And yes, of course, in the explosion at the Arena, well, nothing flies in the opposite direction. We directly refuted the laws of Newton.

        Well, why doesn’t it fly? Small fragments fly. Up. From the height of the explosion - meters from 4-5. Birds, of course, feel sorry, but the infantry no harm.
      3. Kars
        Kars 30 July 2013 20: 34
        +1
        Quote: yanus
        but the second tank next to it will receive

        They didn’t try to disperse the tanks? They say it helps. Both from the bombing and from the artillery.
        Quote: yanus
        why doesn’t it fly - small fragments fly. Up

        And up, and down, and sideways.
        Quote: yanus
        but the infantry no harm

        Of course, necessarily. Especially if, when intercepting an explosive warhead, an anti-tank missile system.
        But someone does not want to understand that the battlefield is generally a dangerous place.
      4. yanus
        yanus 30 July 2013 22: 05
        +1
        Quote: Kars
        They didn’t try to disperse the tanks? They say it helps. Both from the bombing and from the artillery.

        Have you seen urban battles with tanks? There is nowhere to disperse
        Quote: Kars
        And up, and down, and sideways.

        Have you heard anything about guided explosions? Directional stream of fragments? Not? no associations?
      5. Kars
        Kars 30 July 2013 23: 31
        +1
        Quote: yanus
        Have you seen urban battles with tanks? There is nowhere to disperse


        oops immediately and in a city battle? Is it generally hard there
        Quote: yanus
        Have you heard anything about guided explosions? Directional stream of fragments? Not? no associations?

        True? Associations? Will you personally become two meters behind the claymore?
  • svp67
    svp67 30 July 2013 18: 52
    0
    Quote: Spade
    To 100 m.

    Practice shows that infantry should not come off at such a distance, with a maximum of 50 meter, and preferably 10-25 ... Why am I not delighted not with DZ, not from KAZ ...
    1. Kars
      Kars 30 July 2013 19: 20
      +1
      Quote: svp67
      better 10-25 ...

      Just the Barrier is.
    2. Lopatov
      Lopatov 30 July 2013 19: 49
      0
      It is in this case that the "Barrier" is guaranteed to hit the infantry.
    3. Kars
      Kars 30 July 2013 20: 14
      +1
      Quote: Spade
      It is in this case that the "Barrier" is guaranteed to hit the infantry.

      just not.
  • Lopatov
    Lopatov 30 July 2013 19: 28
    +1
    What to do, rockets are becoming more powerful. Already 1500 for DZ take.
  • Gorchilin
    Gorchilin 30 July 2013 18: 03
    -2
    In fact, practice has shown that in an open field, tanks and without infantry are not afraid of anything. They go in battle formations on the lunar landscape, behind the BMP, in front of the firing shaft. It’s impossible to shoot a tank from an RPG in such a situation. Everything is fine, nothing needs to be changed.

    The problem is in difficult conditions. Blockages, mountains, city. In such a situation, the tank should be BEHIND the infantry. The infantry identifies targets, performs target designation, the tank exits, pounding, hiding.

    In this situation, the arena will mow its unit, in an instant. She is useless and dangerous
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 30 July 2013 18: 14
      +3
      And where did she show it? In WoT? The problems begin precisely with reaching the frontier of using RPGs. And it is here that tanks are defenseless without rushed infantry. And no fire ramp will help, by this time the fire will have already been moved long ago, and enemy infantry will crawl out of the shelters.
      1. Gorchilin
        Gorchilin 30 July 2013 19: 13
        -3
        Fire will not be moved. Safety line for infantry - about 400 meters (there are subtleties). The infantryman overcomes 400 meters in 3-4 minutes (if in the mud). There is time to get out and shoot. Tank in a minute. No time. And after him BMP with scumbags.

        Moreover, they do not stop the fire, only the caliber is reduced. Instead of 122/152 weapons of tanks and infantry fighting vehicles. In the open field there is no one to shoot at the tank.

        Well, in the city, won the second Chechen memoirs, returned the tactics of the assault groups of the Great Patriotic War. Then it worked, and now it worked
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 30 July 2013 19: 30
          +1
          Quote: Gorchilin
          Fire will not be moved.

          Will be. Because anti-tank weapons are placed not only in the first trench.
  • Flooding
    Flooding 30 July 2013 17: 50
    +2
    Quote: Gorchilin
    It is dangerous, it will work, it will ruin its own people nearby.

    Give an example of KAZ, not dangerous for nearby manpower.

    Quote: Gorchilin
    Easily dispensed with a number of systems, starting with multi-barrel grenade launchers (RPG-30) and electronic warfare

    Wow, multi-barrel systems have not yet entered service, and you already know how easily they bypass the Arena.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 30 July 2013 18: 04
      0
      RPG-30 is already in the army. About 1000 units.
      1. Flooding
        Flooding 30 July 2013 18: 24
        0
        Quote: Spade
        RPG-30 is already in the army. About 1000 units.

        Thanks for good news. Where did we go?
        Now you need to urgently check the words of Gorchilin.
        Suddenly does not lie telling the truth?
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 30 July 2013 18: 28
          0
          To the warehouses. They are not particularly in demand now.
    2. Gorchilin
      Gorchilin 30 July 2013 18: 26
      -2
      1. ALL such complexes are dangerous, this is their inherent flaw. Moreover, even the usual dynamic protection is very dangerous;

      2. As soon as any noticeable number of such systems appears in the army, there will immediately appear ways to overcome them. In a proportion of about 200+ grenade launchers per tank, it’s cheaper. And yet, they saw in the movie Schvratznegger with a 4-barrel shaitan pipe? A good system, one can feel it. She has long been in the army
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 30 July 2013 18: 29
        +2
        Quote: Gorchilin
        She has long been in the army

        It has long been decommissioned. And it's not a grenade launcher
      2. Flooding
        Flooding 30 July 2013 19: 13
        0
        Quote: Gorchilin
        ALL such complexes are dangerous, this is their inherent flaw.

        That is, you are an ideological opponent of active defense?
        1. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 3 August 2013 10: 21
          0
          Quote: Flood
          That is, you are an ideological opponent of active defense?
          Active protection is sometimes put at the expense of dynamic protection, which is much more effective than active protection (much easier, has no speed limits, more significant impact on the projectile, etc.)
  • burhan
    burhan 30 July 2013 13: 51
    +2
    Quote: ShadowCat
    If you want to defeat the enemy, undermine his faith in himself and his weapons.


    It is not true, the Taliban are driving the West along with their drones, armed with AK-47s, to convince such an enemy that he has poor weapons, vain labor.
  • gych
    gych 30 July 2013 14: 03
    +1
    Quote: burkhan
    Quote: ShadowCat
    If you want to defeat the enemy, undermine his faith in himself and his weapons.

    Well, they are armed not only with Kalash! I came across a photo where they are bearded and with PPSh! And finally, their choice is still small.
    It is not true, the Taliban are driving the West along with their drones, armed with AK-47s, to convince such an enemy that he has poor weapons, vain labor.
  • Regis
    Regis 30 July 2013 15: 12
    +5
    Very pleased with the comments of some Ukrainians about Oplot))

    "Having no analogs supertank, which Russia is never able to surpass))" - I burst into tears)

    The truth is incomprehensible, why are they trying to surpass that which is not, and will never be at the borders of Russia? )
    And what's the difference who has longer and thicker?)

    If now any modern tank can destroy any other modern tank, at least Russian, at least Chinese, at least German, at least Ukrainian.
    Also, any modern tank can be destroyed by a bearded ovpas with RPG.

    Who will be more organized will win. Thanks to the courage and skill of people and only people.
    1. Gorchilin
      Gorchilin 30 July 2013 16: 52
      -7
      The level of understanding is canary.

      No, not every tank can be destroyed with an RPG, especially with an "sheep". Practice has shown that with competent tactics, tanks receive more than a dozen hits without losing their combat effectiveness, they fight for months.

      As for courage, courage without perfect weapons is water in the sand. Looks like a fourfold advantage in tanks burned out at the beginning of the war. Instantly, overnight.
      1. Evgeny_Lev
        Evgeny_Lev 30 July 2013 17: 45
        +5
        As I understand it, Oplot has the best of you))

        You will run in front of him with a net, brush off bops and RPGs fellow
      2. Regis
        Regis 30 July 2013 18: 04
        +5
        oh these slow-witted Ukrainian patriots)

        Quote: Gorchilin
        No, not every tank can be destroyed with an RPG, especially with an "sheep". Practice has shown that with competent tactics, tanks receive more than a dozen hits without losing their combat effectiveness, they fight for months.

        Your example about tanks with a bunch of hits, alas, in no way refutes my statement: that every tank can be destroyed from an RPG. (By the way, in Syria, T-72s are fighting well with more than "ten hits")

        Quote: Gorchilin
        As for courage, courage without perfect weapons is water in the sand. Looks like a fourfold advantage in tanks burned out at the beginning of the war. Instantly, overnight.

        So the fact of the matter is my recent friend, that all modern MBT of developed countries is the perfect weapon fellow And the battle between them will be the skill of the crews and the command soldier

        And they wrote about the four-time advantage on the forum more than once (more precisely, in what condition this supposedly was an advantage), and this, by the way, once again confirms my point: it’s not the technology that fights - people fight.
  • burhan
    burhan 30 July 2013 15: 19
    +2
    Good news:
    - The US Department of Defense is criticized for buying Mi-17 military helicopters from Russia for Afghanistan. According to a number of senators and organizations, the US side overpays for these machines. But the Pentagon simply has no choice; there is nothing to replace these cars with.

    repeat
  • alicante11
    alicante11 30 July 2013 15: 38
    +1
    People, why are you fooling around. + 5 mm here, -5 mm there. The question is in proper application. Look at the 41 year summer campaign. Were the Germans better tanks than the KV and T-34? Did not have. And the result?
    Take the Wehrmacht's French campaign. There B1 in general did any German tank for "time". Did it help the Franks? And how much of our excellent technology did the Arabs give the Jews?
    Well, if we talk about commercial attractiveness, then the people here vote with the "dollar". And on account of the fact that loans are forgiven. So all the same you will not take these loans and everyone understands this. And so real real money. Therefore, to call tanks free is a fat troll.
    1. Gorchilin
      Gorchilin 30 July 2013 17: 04
      -2
      The Germans had tanks. They were better than the T-34.

      Remember how Rezun scoffed at the 38-ton tank, more precisely, the Czech T-38? Like, light, clumsy?

      So, in comparison with ANY Soviet, this tank, very mediocre by the standards of the Wehrmacht, was a flying saucer.

      Whereas on a T-34 with a 4-speed gearbox, the first gear was switched on only by two, a poker, then the T-38 has a 12-speed gearbox, a pneumatic drive. Caterpillars with a 3000 km mileage, unbelievable! Excellent optics, observation and communication devices.

      This is a car of a completely different level, a different generation! It was quite successfully fought until the end of the war, already in the guise of a hatzer.

      The difference is the difference that after a march of several hundred kilometers, Soviet tanks turned into a pile of scrap metal, of course. they had to be restored for a long time and consistently. And the same T-38s could perform sequential operations to great depths, bypasses and ranges.

      That's the difference! Towards the end of the war, and Soviet technology reached a certain level. We put a 5-speed box, licked the structure. During the "Stalinist strikes" tanks were able to carry out operations for almost 700 kilometers. Well, in Manchuria, a record was set at all.

      At the beginning of the war, they could not and could not do anything like that. At the beginning of the war, our tanks and the commander didn’t, he acted as a gunner and did not even have a commander’s turret
      1. es.d
        es.d 30 July 2013 18: 04
        0
        Guys! Let's beat the VAZ together! Why are you cursing? They sit on the same tree, on different branches and gnaw the trunk.
        PS I have a relation to mechanical engineering.
      2. Ulan
        Ulan 30 July 2013 18: 08
        +1
        Then why write about "4-fold superiority?" This is amateurism.
        Why hopefully guess for yourself.
        1. Gorchilin
          Gorchilin 30 July 2013 19: 16
          -5
          Exactly. The colossal organizational and technical superiority of the Wehrmacht made it possible to completely neutralize the multiple superiority of the USSR in tanks.

          There were many tanks, but they were extremely lousy. So lousy that the Wehrmacht, taking into service everything in the field, could not really use Soviet equipment. The main thing is the French tanks of 1917, and they fit together, but the Soviet release of the 30s did nothing.
          1. KazaK Bo
            KazaK Bo 30 July 2013 20: 44
            +2
            Quote: Gorchilin
            French tanks of 1917, and they fit, but the Soviet release of the 30s did nothing.

            ... sorry ... are you also paid out? Who do you receive grants from?
            Yes, so ... in passing I will note for your "erudition" - it was the Germans who were the first to call the T-34, IS and KV tanks the best tanks of WWII ... they tried to repeat the T-2 ... but could not do it quickly. ..for this they needed two years ...
          2. alicante11
            alicante11 31 July 2013 01: 44
            -1
            What are you? You should at least read Vicki if you don’t know anything else about this. And what did Manstein Sevastopol storm? Why say stupid things?
            Here on the site recently there were articles about the use of captured tanks by the Germans. so you don’t even have to go far.
      3. family tree
        family tree 30 July 2013 23: 48
        +2
        Quote: Gorchilin
        Remember how Rezun scoffed at the 38-ton tank, more precisely, the Czech T-38? Like, light, clumsy?

        So, in comparison with ANY Soviet, this tank, very mediocre by the standards of the Wehrmacht, was a flying saucer.

        Oh, and how Carius adored him, which Otto
        “We cursed the fragile and inflexible Czech steel, which did not become an obstacle for the Russian anti-tank 45 mm gun. The wreckage of our own armor plates and mounting bolts did more damage than the fragments and the shell itself. ”
        lol
        1. alicante11
          alicante11 31 July 2013 01: 46
          0
          But it’s convenient to go and bounce less on bumps. In general, the tank is still bullshit - there was no stable in it. And stoves for the winter.
      4. alicante11
        alicante11 31 July 2013 01: 42
        -1
        So why troll something? Let's say the transmission is good. And the armor piercing of the gun, and the armor?
        A tank is not a car to pray for a gearbox and hodovka. Yes, these are important things. But even that sledgehammer, which was called KV in the field, simply flattened your vaunted Czech like a rolling pin a piece of dough. And leaked from all angles and from any distance
        Our tanks had many shortcomings. But they were not able to make a medium or heavy tank light.

        At the beginning of the war, they could not and could not do anything like that. At the beginning of the war, our tanks and the commander didn’t, he acted as a gunner and did not even have a commander’s turret


        Affiget, what a big omission. There will be a neat hole in the Czech in the place of the commander’s turret, and in the T-34, the gunner’s commander will continue to perform his duties. That’s the whole difference.
        1. svp67
          svp67 31 July 2013 01: 48
          -1
          Quote: alicante11
          Affiget, what a big omission.
          You can laugh further, but thanks to the fact that on ALL German tanks the commander was indeed a commander, and not a jack of all trades, German tanks had a great advantage over ours, including the commander’s turret - not an extra innovation for the victory of one tank over to others or just to increase the chances of survival of the tank on the battlefield ...
          1. maxvet
            maxvet 31 July 2013 23: 05
            -1
            I read at Baryatinsky that I was ready to launch the T-34M, five crew members, a 5-speed gearbox, a large turret with a turret, a torsion bar suspension, an adequate air filter, and observation devices for the driver and gunner. Even by June 22, 50 towers were made . But the war ...
            Therefore, the t-34 did not seem to be modernized immediately. And if it was technically weak, then its concept (gun, weight, armor, mobility) was really advanced at that time.
  • Wendor
    Wendor 30 July 2013 15: 39
    +1
    Eh, how are you, gentlemen, dragged on.
    the problem of the "cheap" T-90 is not worth such nerves. Yes, the technology worked out at the T-72 is used, and Ukraine is promoting the T-80 technology. But they are being bought, so someone needs them. Demand creates supply. But Abrashi and the others are standing in the corner and not gu-gu.
    Yes, the T-72s were burning in Grozny (God forbid that this ever happened again), and the Abrams did not glow weakly in Baghdad. It all depends on the commanders, someone will send infantry forward (remember how the stormtroopers took Berlin in 1945), and someone in 2 hours with a paratrooper regiment;)
    It's just that it is incomprehensible to our Motherland as an eternally tormented Motherland (I'm talking about Russia), it is necessary for ourselves to invent something new, not to dwell on the glorious heritage of the USSR, but to seek and implement. And how much a T-90 or "Oplot" costs, it's all secondary. The main thing in the end is not to feed someone else's army.
    1. family tree
      family tree 31 July 2013 00: 00
      +1
      Quote: Wendor
      . But Abrashi and the rest are in the corner and not gu-gu.

      Abrakov was sold to the Egyptians, then the truth of the unrest happened there, for some reason. I don’t mean anything, it brought something request
  • Bimmer
    Bimmer 30 July 2013 15: 52
    0
    Quote: Rakti-Kali
    Quote: lonely
    moreover, earlier modifications participated in Chechen companies and were practically invulnerable

    Well, only if the T-72 is considered an early modification ... winked
    The T-90 was not used as a standard weapon for tank or motorized rifle units and formations in both campaigns on the territory of the Czech Republic, at least until the end of the active phase of the CTO.


    [media = http: //vk.com/video15039920_165572376]

    6:50 Which tank?
    1. Kars
      Kars 30 July 2013 16: 04
      +2
      Quote: BIMMER
      [media = http: //vk.com/video15039920_165572376]

      Wildly sorry but
      http://vk.com/video15039920_165572376

      gives out 200 rollers.
    2. Rakti-kali
      Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 18: 25
      0
      Quote: BIMMER
      [media = http: //vk.com/video15039920_165572376] 6:50 Which tank?

      Give a link to a less crap resource, please.
  • michajlo
    michajlo 30 July 2013 16: 09
    +3
    Good day to all!
    The article itself, as a reaction to the cooling of the sovereign and Russian defense industry - big +!
    I will join the statement above that the information war without respite goes to a FULL REEL, therefore, those who succumb to it need to explain and show the reasons why all sorts of fables and fairy tales are written by "our friends" from the USA, NATO, Israel or the Moslem countries. And the goal for them is ignorant people, young people and others who are easily amenable to enemy influence.
    Again, all sorts of unfortunate experts harass and denigrate Soviet and Russian tanks and lament about their UNPLEASABLE low prices in the world market and their amusing success in marketing in the world.
    I'm not special in armored vehicles, but I think that the main thing is taking into account all the parameters of the performance characteristics + training and courage of the crews and harmony with other parts in a real battle, and then by itself the Russian tanks will be unequivocally FIRST.
    What is upsetting is that for some individual weaknesses that any product has, since you have to strive for the ideal, but it is hard to achieve, and probably when discussing technical details after all, we should not speak to each other in a sharp style.
    Well, that unfortunately we all see here on the pages of Voen.Ozoreniya, that as a result of the already implemented principle "Divide and conquer!" (for the period 1991-2013), the tank building of Russia and Ukraine was disunited, and in the foreign market, and now my native Ukraine is opposed to fraternal Russia and collaborates with opponents from the US and NATO!
    This is already "a very high price for independence" and other ideological inventions "for the blind and deaf."
    Moreover, so far, the return of Ukraine to the circle of fraternal peoples in the CU and EAEC, by the Kiev elite, has been delayed.
  • Bimmer
    Bimmer 30 July 2013 16: 16
    +1
    Quote: Kars
    Quote: BIMMER
    [media = http: //vk.com/video15039920_165572376]

    Wildly sorry but
    http://vk.com/video15039920_165572376

    gives out 200 rollers.


    Sorry, I can't figure it out - newbie. Film by A. Sladkov "The Road to HELL" 1994-1995. T-90 flashes there very often
    1. Kars
      Kars 30 July 2013 16: 54
      +2
      _______________________
    2. Rakti-kali
      Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 18: 31
      +2
      Quote: BIMMER
      Sorry, I can't figure it out - newbie. Film by A. Sladkov "The Road to HELL" 1994-1995. T-90 flashes there very often

      T-72B with VDZ Contact V, if my vision does not fail.
      Oh, comrade Kars has already given an answer, moreover, a visual one.
  • Kasym
    Kasym 30 July 2013 16: 34
    +6
    I'm not special. on tanks, but read an interview with America. the tankman who served America. a testing ground where all armored vehicles are tested (in my opinion even on this site) from all over the world.
    In short, something like this. Take the duel of two tanks: Abrams versus T-72. Abrams, to effectively counteract the T-72, you need to get close to a distance of 3 km. The T-72, starting from 5 km, can already seriously oppose any tank thanks to its missile and gun armament. So, let's imagine a situation that we found another other at a distance of 5 km. ... I begin to approach the T-72. Charging yspeel before moving to charge the gun. During the movement, the loader cannot do anything, because. holds on to the wickedness so as not to fall. The T-72 can already fire its own missiles. And it doesn't even pierce my armor and let's imagine that half of the missiles go into "milk". But even one hit can damage my optics, demolish equipment and dynam.protection on the armor. Then I approached 3 km and opened fire - hit or hit, but I had to stop to reload. That is, I lose in maneuverability. And the T-72 loses and loses on the move: it has AZ, it does not lose maneuverability from this (and even if it does not pierce me, it will sweep everything off the armor). Of course, a lot depends on the skill of the crew. But I need to constantly stop to recharge and at this moment I am the most vulnerable. So, draw your own conclusions. But if I didn't knock out the T-72 from the first shot, then .... And if the T-72 is the latest generation of din. protection, and if the Curtain is still standing (with it I actually can't even aim), then ... it's a very serious opponent.
    Something like this . Of course, tanks with AZ began to appear in the West, but how many y of them are a maximum of a hundred. In short, our tankers are very happy with their T-72s (I'm about the Armed Forces of the Republic of Kazakhstan). I am not talking about the T-90. hi
    1. Gorchilin
      Gorchilin 30 July 2013 17: 17
      0
      1.You look in the window and look for a place from where you can see for 5 kilometers. There are very few places like that!

      2. KUV T-72 allowed to fire only from stops. The tank turns into a motionless target, with corresponding consequences;

      3. The experience of the war in South Ossetia showed that, with very primitive means of electronic warfare, the American accomplice of the mountain democrats completely paralyzed the military communications. That is, the T-72 will fight alone against a complex system. Americans will always know where the enemy is doing what;

      4. A little smoke or fog - T-72 is blind. Americans shoot him with impunity using a thermal imaging sight.

      5. The security of the American car is higher. Hit, and what will happen? There during the first war in Iraq they got halffire into abrams. The warhead there is more powerful than our cumulative shells. The crew is alive, healthy, but in a panic. The tank survived but went into repair. 20 tons of weight difference is basically more and more armor, protection
      1. Rakti-kali
        Rakti-kali 30 July 2013 18: 39
        +4
        Quote: Gorchilin
        20 tons of weight difference is basically more and more armor, protection

        H. erny city. What is Abrasha's booked volume? Now compare with the T-72. Feel the difference?
      2. Kasym
        Kasym 30 July 2013 23: 13
        +1
        Mustard.
        1. In the artillery they say: "Whoever shoots farther wins!" I do not think that Western tankers will refuse such a "long arm".
        2. Unfortunately I did not know. But the AZ definitely gives an advantage, at least in the size of the tank, it does not need charging. Sorry, of course, maybe this is funny for you, but what is KYV?
        3. I just bluntly compare 2 tanks. Of course, you can "add" both aviation and artillery.
        4. Ny thermal imaging sight, I think, can be put on the T-72 in the presence of funds and desire.
        5. Here is a moot point. In addition to armor and dynamos. Shields and Active Shields can be installed on the T-72 - I haven’t heard about Abrams, although I will repeat it as an amateur. But in the dimensions of the T-72 it’s smaller, it’s not much, but nevertheless it’s easier to get into a larger target.
        Sincerely hi
        1. Kasym
          Kasym 30 July 2013 23: 54
          +2
          Gorchilin Dmitry. Y my key with the letter "y" is not working, so when I type "KYB" in the search engine, switching to the English alphabet, it perceives it as a KV tank. If "KYB" is some kind of controlled shot. Then you misunderstood - after approaching up to 3 km, the T-72 starts firing conventional armor-piercing shells.
          Corrected your "-1" to "0".
  • ausguck
    ausguck 30 July 2013 16: 58
    +2
    Well, if such outspoken liberal publications as Lenta.vru and Newsvru.com appeared in the sources for the article about which the author is talking, then there is nothing special to be surprised, for them to justify something Russian is daily tedious work, working off an order, and with some unknown "experts", too, is a long-standing and proven feature ... These "experts" have been divorced like uncut dogs, but when you wonder what kind of experts, where did they come from, do they even have the right to be called experts! and there is no one, these "experts" elusive as garbage rats ..)))
  • Gorchilin
    Gorchilin 30 July 2013 17: 11
    -2
    Quote: Setrac
    All your arguments will be interrupted by one single, T-90 in production.


    .. well, we add, and this production is accompanied by high-profile scandals at the highest level. Outdated T-90, outdated. Russian Defense Ministry does not want to buy it, all the more so. A lot of questions on quality and resource.

    And foreign buyers manage to breathe it in only with a GIFT. Like, for example, Algeria. They wrote off a huge debt, under the obligation to buy this tank for a much smaller amount. Bad tank for nothing. So production is supported.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 30 July 2013 17: 28
      +2
      And, that's why the "stronghold" is doing so badly in foreign markets ...
      1. Kars
        Kars 30 July 2013 17: 54
        +1
        Quote: Spade
        And, that's why the "stronghold" is doing so badly in foreign markets ...

        We can’t sell it in debt. Or forgive debts. And it’s hard to put political pressure on Azerbaijan.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 30 July 2013 18: 16
          +5
          Exactly. And even dumping does not help. They do not want to buy, and that's it.
          1. Kars
            Kars 30 July 2013 19: 22
            +1
            Quote: Spade
            Exactly. And even dumping does not help. They do not want to buy, and that's it.

            Well, of course - T-90 was bought by the giants of the world armies)) Uganda, Azerbaijan, Algeria and India, which had no choice since it is tied to the tank factory for the production of T-72 and then tries, torturing Arjun. Probably from delight on T-90S

            And you are just dumping. If you of course know what this word means. This T-90 network is cheap.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 30 July 2013 19: 50
              +2
              And who bought the world's best "Oplot"?
              1. Kars
                Kars 30 July 2013 20: 16
                +2
                Quote: Spade
                And who bought the world's best "Oplot"?

                Thailand.
                20th place in the ranking of the armed forces.
                http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.asp
      2. Regis
        Regis 30 July 2013 18: 51
        +3
        Quote: Spade
        And, that's why the "stronghold" is doing so badly in foreign markets ...

        Apparently the tank is too good for this planet ...
  • Drummer
    Drummer 30 July 2013 17: 26
    +2
    Quote: ausguck
    As an example of the readiness to repel the attack of Russian tanks, the material cites some “third-generation missiles,” which the Shtora optical-electronic suppression complex can no longer fight. It is also argued that the capabilities of the Arena active defense system do not allow the tank to be protected from sub-caliber shells and shock nuclei of cumulative ammunition. The final claim for the protection of the T-90 concerns the lack of serious protection against attacks from the upper hemisphere, which is said to render the Russian tank unusable in war conditions.

    What's wrong with that? Components "Curtains" - IR-searchlight and jammer cannot effectively deal with modern ATGM, and "Arena" can hit fast-flying targets (maximum ammunition speed up to 700 m / s).
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 30 July 2013 17: 37
      +3
      The "Javelin" has a speed of 290 m / s. The fastest NATO ATGM, the MGM-166 LOSAT, is the only one that can have a speed of more than 700 m / s. But there are only 12 (twelve)
      1. Drummer
        Drummer 30 July 2013 17: 41
        0