Military Review

"Resident's mistake" or how the T-64 tank became M-1971

62
The Soviet medium tank was put into service in the 1966 year. This combat vehicle, weighing only 36 tons, in terms of protection characteristics, firepower matched or even surpassed the machines of the heavier class.


"Resident's mistake" or how the T-64 tank became M-1971

The original loader 115-mm gun allowed up to three people to reduce the size of the crew and ensure the rate of fire to 10 minute shots. The compact 700-strong engine accelerates the tank to 65-70 km / h.

Possessed this tank and other innovations, because of which from the very beginning of its existence in the troops it was enveloped in a dense shroud of secrecy. In 1967, more than 200 T-64s took part in the Dnepr large-scale maneuvers, which were dedicated to the 50th anniversary of the October Revolution. Participation of new tanks went unnoticed by Western intelligence. T-64s simply got lost in a tank armada of T-10, T-54, T-55 and T-62. They were not in the combat drill near Kiev, where they drove thousands of tank armada, which stood in dense armored rows, which is called from horizon to horizon.

The next large-scale action was the "Dvina" combined-arms maneuvers, which were held in March 1970, just before the Lenin 100-year anniversary.

The field of training battle was Belarus, where the divisions of the Moscow, Leningrad, Baltic and North-Caucasian military districts were deployed.

T-64 tanks were also involved in these "battles". These maneuvers were covered by representatives of many Soviet media. They, apparently, and managed to "light up" these combat vehicles. As a result, about a year later, the first images of tanks, which were already in service with the whole five-year plan, turned out to be in the West through some channels.



These spy photos are posted on alejandro-8.blogspot.ru. There are also analytical materials from the British intelligence about the T-64. Of course, intelligence analysts did not know the name of this tank, so they assigned it the designation M-1971 by the year they received the photos. They estimated the weight of the tank in 39-40 tons. In reality, as reported above, its combat mass was no more than 36,7 tons. The caliber of the gun in the 115-mm was correctly evaluated. But wrong with the crew. It was considered that the 4 man is still in the tank. Experts had no idea that there was a mechanized charging system, which is not surprising. In order to see this innovation in the photo, one would need to have X-ray vision.

Foreign experts drew attention to the fact that the commander's turret is located on the right side of the tower, to the possible presence of radiation protection of the crew hatches. Another undercarriage with rollers of smaller diameter struck them. What is curious, not only the British, but also other NATO specialists seriously believed that the M-1971 used elements of the undercarriage of the Soviet heavy tank T-10. Although it is actually not the case.

It can be assumed that NATO members noted with great satisfaction for themselves that the laser range finder was not used on the tank. Here the USSR was really some lag.

Not right, the British estimated the size of the car, for example, the height of the tank was determined by them in the 2,5 meter, in fact, the T-64 was very low for its class tank, only 2,1 m.


More detailed information on the T-64, however, in modification “A”, was obtained by NATO members when these tanks appeared in service with the formations of the Group of Soviet Forces in Germany.

And if NATO members more or less knew their potential opponents, then Soviet citizens for the first time officially learned about the existence of the T-64 tanks only in the 1986 year. And the same T-64А was declassified only in 1988.
Originator:
http://www.vestnik-rm.ru/
62 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 1 November 2013 09: 37
    +9
    The Union knew how to keep secrets, maybe there just wasn’t the Internet yet ...
    1. Mih
      Mih 25 January 2015 21: 58
      0
      Soviet citizens first officially learned about the existence of T-64 tanks only in 1986

      Soviet citizens knew about the existence of T-64 tanks only in 1986 !!!!! How funny you are!
  2. Echo
    Echo 1 November 2013 10: 54
    0
    The Union knew how to keep secrets, maybe there just wasn’t the Internet yet ...

    Oh, and drank this "secret" tank of blood from our brother ... This "secrecy" of the T-64 was largely ensured by the fact that it was the most unsuccessful tank of the Soviet Army. With many of the T-64's flaws, which simply overshadowed and trampled a few merits to dust, this tank was simply hated by the troops. By the way, due to the disgusting running features and the wildly marine engine, the T-64 was NEVER exported. Compare this with the T-72, which has become the most widespread and copied tank in the world. So they kept the existence of this tank-feil a secret, so as not to lose face.

    Of course, all the shortcomings of the T-64 can be attributed to the fact that it was the first Soviet MBT, there was no experience in creating such machines. But this is just an excuse - the main, incorrigible flaw of the T-64 was precisely in the infernally unsuccessful undercarriage, all the jambs of which could easily be identified even before testing, but simply by looking at the drawings. But it didn’t work out - someone, apparently, was pretty crazy for someone to put this Kharkov miracle into service, delivering a lot of unforgettable impressions to the poor fellow soldiers.
    1. neri73-r
      neri73-r 1 November 2013 11: 07
      +3
      He was the first in the family of main tanks, and, as you know, the first pancake is lumpy !!! On it a lot was run in, that would be implemented on subsequent models.
    2. GastaClaus69
      GastaClaus69 1 November 2013 13: 42
      +1
      Quote: Echo
      This "secrecy" of the T-64 was largely ensured by the fact that it was the most unsuccessful tank in the Soviet Army.

      I agree that the successful service of the KV-2 and T-28/35, T-37A / 38/40, T-26, BT series tanks is generally overshadowed by some kind of T-64.
      Quote: Echo
      With many shortcomings of the T-64, which simply overshadowed and trampled on the dust a few advantages, this tank was simply hated by the troops. By the way, due to disgusting running features and a wildly marine engine, the T-64 was NEVER exported.

      What kind of modification is it that they hate her so much? I didn’t hear anything particularly hateful from our tankers, but Bulat was only praised, apparently because they were not used for long, only about 8. Well, not for monkeys, the tank was created, but for trained crews and the service was normal. To a word if the Ukrainian. the army continued to operate the T-72 spare parts for which it was produced in Russia, we would have had the same problems.
      Quote: Echo
      Compare with the same T-72, which has become the most common and replicated tank in the world.

      It has become fashionable today to breed Holivar 64 vs 72.
      And the T-72 has earned an excellent reputation as a tank of one hit, not because the shit tank 0, but because propaganda and crews are at the level of development of Homo erectus.
      Quote: Echo
      Of course, all the shortcomings of the T-64 can be attributed to the fact that it was the first Soviet MBT, there was no experience in creating such machines. But this is just an excuse - the main, incorrigible flaw of the T-64 was precisely in the infernally unsuccessful undercarriage, all the jambs of which could easily be identified even before testing, but simply by looking at the drawings.

      Everyone imagines himself a strategist seeing the battle from the side!
      Quote: Echo
      But it didn’t work out - someone, apparently, was terribly crazy for someone to use this Kharkov miracle, delivering a lot of unforgettable impressions to the poor fellow soldiers.

      No more than any other tank.
    3. svp67
      svp67 1 November 2013 13: 46
      15
      Quote: Echo
      . By the way, due to disgusting running features and a wildly marine engine, the T-64 was NEVER exported. Compare with the same T-72, which became the most common and replicated tank in the world.

      Do not beat stupid things ...
      The T64 all its time, until it was issued, was the MOST ADVANCED TANK OF THE USSR, since all new weapons systems were installed on it and massively tested. It is enough to recall the same complex of guided weapons. T72 has ALWAYS been evaluated in the USSR as a LIGHTEN (mobilization, export) version of T64.
      Well, everything has its time, the T64 was replaced by the T80, in which many issues were already solved more successfully. And in place of T72 came T90, in which many problems of T72 remained ...
      So before COMMENT learn the mat.chast ...
      1. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 1 November 2013 13: 56
        +5
        Quote: svp67
        So before COMMENT learn the mat.chast ...

        good

        And here, along the way, tank srach between ... specialists is brewing again.
        Sergey, can we move away and have a drink?
        Let's look from the side?
        wink

        It was always amusing: you served on T-64 and T-80, I on T-72.
        And why aren't we fighting?
        lol
        1. Kars
          Kars 1 November 2013 14: 02
          +6
          Quote: Aleks tv
          Let's look from the side?

          that’s why we have the so-called srachi because the professionals step aside instead of sharing worldly wisdom.

          and could by the way and argue who will show himself better on his tank
          1. Aleks tv
            Aleks tv 1 November 2013 14: 10
            +1
            Quote: Kars
            who will show himself better on his tank

            Too many factors that we cannot predict.

            And the photo is valid, Andrey.
            How many times I look at her, constantly laughing.
            laughing
            1. Kars
              Kars 1 November 2013 14: 17
              +1
              Quote: Aleks tv
              Too many factors

              And we will take the memorable tank biathlon. And put T-62 T-64BV T-72B T-80У
              1. svp67
                svp67 1 November 2013 14: 21
                +1
                Quote: Kars
                And we will take the memorable tank biathlon. And put T-62 T-64BV T-72B T-80У

                Of course, a lot, if not everything will depend on the training of the crew, but with all the same components, I think the places will be distributed like this: T80U, T64B, T72B and T62 ...
                1. Kars
                  Kars 1 November 2013 14: 27
                  +1
                  Quote: svp67
                  places will be distributed as follows: T80U, T64B, T72B and T62 ...

                  And I don’t need anything else.
                  1. svp67
                    svp67 1 November 2013 16: 08
                    +1
                    Quote: Kars
                    And I don’t need anything else.

                    Well, given the current "state of affairs", it is worth lengthening the "run" route and the T64B will give way to the T72B second place ...
                    1. Kars
                      Kars 1 November 2013 16: 14
                      +1
                      Quote: svp67
                      it is worth lengthening the "run" route and T64B will give way to T72B second place ...

                      Can then push the targets and enter the task of fire on the move?

                      And so what? And how long is the track to lengthen?
                      1. svp67
                        svp67 1 November 2013 17: 46
                        0
                        Quote: Kars
                        Can then push the targets and enter the task of fire on the move?

                        It's not fair...
                        Quote: Kars
                        And so what? And how long is the track to lengthen?

                        Well, two times like this ... the T72B simply has a "thrust-to-weight ratio" higher and the BKP have slightly better performance in terms of speed ...
                      2. Kars
                        Kars 1 November 2013 19: 21
                        +2
                        Quote: svp67
                        It's not fair...



                        Quote: svp67
                        Well, two times so ...

                        it can be survived.
                      3. svp67
                        svp67 1 November 2013 19: 46
                        +1
                        Quote: Kars
                        it can be survived.
                      4. Anthony
                        Anthony 1 November 2013 21: 26
                        0
                        Quote: svp67
                        svp67



                        and the targets do not show that would not be ashamed? from the side, of course everything looks so beautiful ... and most importantly, from the place of shooting ...
                      5. svp67
                        svp67 3 November 2013 09: 30
                        0
                        Quote: Anthony
                        and the targets do not show that would not be ashamed? from the side, of course everything looks so beautiful ... and most importantly, from the place of shooting ...

                        The crews there are professionals, so that the defeat of targets is almost 100%, they have nothing to be ashamed of. The video is advertising ... and there were plenty of viewers, the footage was from UralArmExpo ...
                  2. svp67
                    svp67 1 November 2013 19: 48
                    +2
                    Quote: Kars
                    it can be survived.
                  3. Kars
                    Kars 1 November 2013 20: 09
                    +2
                    ______________


                  4. svp67
                    svp67 1 November 2013 20: 19
                    0
                    Interestingly, I especially like the "winter" TSh3 on tankers, that the reserves of the "summer" ones have already ended and the P173 is poorly supplied, so they suffer with the P123, poor fellows ... there is no money.

                    And the question seemed to me, or the second video shows a "rifled" barrel?
                  5. Kars
                    Kars 1 November 2013 20: 29
                    +1
                    Quote: svp67
                    And the question seemed to me, or the second video shows a "rifled" barrel?

                    at what second? and most likely it seemed.
                  6. svp67
                    svp67 2 November 2013 10: 00
                    0
                    Quote: Kars
                    at what second?

                    01min51sec ....
                  7. Kars
                    Kars 2 November 2013 16: 43
                    +1
                    Quote: svp67
                    01min51sec ....

                    And if it’s not an extra barrel? I honestly have never seen them.
                  8. Vereshagin
                    Vereshagin 2 November 2013 22: 12
                    0
                    But you can’t put a camcorder in the barrel.
                  9. Kars
                    Kars 2 November 2013 22: 16
                    +1
                    Quote: Vereshagin
                    But you can’t put a camcorder in the barrel.

                    And why put it when there is a digital and optical zoom?

                    Quote: svp67
                    01min51sec ....

                    Your suggestion?
                  10. svp67
                    svp67 3 November 2013 09: 19
                    0
                    Quote: Kars
                    Your suggestion?

                    Honestly - I don’t know, but it is very similar to the 100 mm T55 barrel, maybe the shots are old or the operator took off the "self-propelled gun" "from the inside" ... they have rifled barrels ... This is a huge training ground, where the gunners study.
                  11. Kars
                    Kars 3 November 2013 12: 17
                    +1
                    Quote: svp67
                    This is a huge training ground, where artillerymen study there.

                    can be.
      2. papik09
        papik09 3 November 2013 08: 09
        -3
        Need to be baptized if it seems laughing On Soviet tanks, starting with the T-64, SMOOTHING guns are installed. First there was 115 mm, then (and now) 125 mm.
      3. svp67
        svp67 3 November 2013 09: 22
        +2
        Quote: papik09
        On Soviet tanks, starting with the T-64, SMOOTHING guns are installed. First there was 115 mm, then (and now) 125 mm.

        "Baptized" you are ours, for your information the first smooth-bore SERIAL gun was 115 mm TP 5UTS at T62, T64 was a little late ...
        Anything else you want to add?
  • Abracadabra
    Abracadabra 1 November 2013 20: 53
    0
    Is that on the sides of the tower (T-80 UD?), "Drozd", or "Drozd 2"?
  • svp67
    svp67 1 November 2013 14: 33
    +1
    Funny soldiers - oil on canvas, apparently inspired by this photo ... and maybe something else repeat
  • svp67
    svp67 1 November 2013 14: 11
    +1
    Quote: Kars
    Quote: Aleks tv
    Let's look from the side?

    and could by the way and argue who will show himself better on his tank

    By the way, the photo is not the best ... Angolan tankers on the CHINESE light tank, not the best equipment, and the specialists are not very ...
  • Alex 241
    Alex 241 1 November 2013 14: 19
    +2
    ...........................................
  • Max otto
    Max otto 1 November 2013 15: 40
    +1
    Quote: Kars

    that’s why we have the so-called srachi because the professionals step aside instead of sharing worldly wisdom.

    and could by the way and argue who will show himself better on his tank

    By the way, I also noticed. My dad is a tanker, in the GSVG he served on the T-55 (it seems) and T-64, in the KBVO on the T-72 and T-80, I won’t tell you the exact modifications, but he never complained about the tanks as long as I live since not a single crooked word on any of them.
  • svp67
    svp67 1 November 2013 14: 05
    +3
    Quote: Aleks tv
    And why aren't we fighting?

    Yes, because we did one thing, we had and I hope we still have enough SPECIAL knowledge and therefore we knew what to expect from technology and what to expect from it. No "pink" or "black" glasses ... Each of these tanks had and has both its pros and cons. The most offensive thing is that, by and large, they are EQUAL ... Only now they had different opportunities for modernization and I really regret that the T80 branch is now developing abroad, although there was hope for a change after the news about the release of the T90MS ... But again that then it goes wrong with us. Together with this handsome man, the "semi-finished product" T72B3 goes to the army, and even poorly "molded"
  • svp67
    svp67 1 November 2013 14: 13
    +1
    Sash, judging by some data, it looks like this video is from this part, in which the "defective" T90 came. Honestly, they are the "penguins" too, once again the cable is too lazy ...
  • Kars
    Kars 1 November 2013 13: 51
    +2



    ___________________________________--
  • svp67
    svp67 1 November 2013 15: 54
    +3
    Quote: Echo
    T-64 ... the most unsuccessful tank
    The last of which left the gates of the plant in 1987 and still serve faithfully, they knew how to do it hard in the USSR, we would "remember" how to do it this way ...

    One clarification - these tanks, everything in the video "made in the USSR"
  • Anthony
    Anthony 1 November 2013 21: 19
    +2
    Quote: Echo
    it was the most unsuccessful tank of the Soviet Army.



    Mdaaa ... and so the T-72 didn’t go from the T-64 ... Like it or not, the T-64 was everything for the first time, and this particular tank is the destroyer of all subsequent tanks. And it would not hurt you to read the history of the creation of the car, and you would know that the problems with the chassis were caused by the fact that there was an order from the ministry to lighten the tank as much as possible, so they sacrificed a hodovka.
    But as it was correctly noticed, the tank was made for an experienced crew, able to fight and not walk in a column.
    At this time, it is the T-64s that are being re-equipped and the "BULAT" is being released not the T-72, not the T-80 ... although these machines are in abundance.
    And the T-72 was already done with an eye on the T-64 and of course they improved something. But there is one "BUT" - they looked exactly at the T-64 and did it, no matter how "bad" it was!
    So learn the story. The T-64 scared Europe and America for a long time. It was this tank that was the basis of everything that we have in tank building, and it was it, the T-64 was created by the great tank designer Alexander Morozov, the man who created the T-34, T-44, T-54!
  • REZMovec
    REZMovec 2 November 2013 02: 22
    +2
    This tank is for professionals, not boys with a "seven-year-old" in the pocket of which there are three "corridors". And the officers transferred from the T-54/55. And this is heaven and earth. When the Kharkov tank school began to train "letekh" on the T-64, everything was fine.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Echo
    Echo 1 November 2013 16: 16
    +6
    Quote: svp67
    Do not beat stupid things ...

    Yes, I do not flog. It's just that I was dealing with T-64 and T-72 in the service. And with full responsibility, in a clear mind and good health, I declare - the T-64 compared to the T-72 is just a tank nightmare. I don’t argue, this was the first MBT in the Soviet army, it was needed to gain experience in service and combat use, but with the advent of the T-72 it would be better to remove all T-64 from the troops.

    I never saw the T-80 in my eyes, but I heard a large number of reviews about it, mostly very positive. I myself can’t say anything good about the T-64, and I have never heard anything good from others, although, of course, everything is learned by comparison.

    However, everything is said before me. A couple of years ago here, on Topwar, there was a very good comparative review. Here it is: http://topwar.ru/9310-sravnenie-tankov-t-64-t-80-it-72-iz-lichnogo-opyta.html

    Nothing to add.
    1. Kars
      Kars 1 November 2013 16: 26
      +1
      Quote: Echo
      http://topwar.ru/9310-sravnenie-tankov-t-64-t-80-i-t-72-iz-lichnogo-opyta.html

      Et yes, its author was so laughed at here so that he doesn’t stick his nose here with Valor.
    2. svp67
      svp67 1 November 2013 16: 28
      0
      Quote: Echo
      I just dealt with T-64 and T-72 on service

      Did you just "see" them or did you learn to exploit them somewhere?
    3. svp67
      svp67 1 November 2013 16: 37
      0
      Quote: Echo
      but with the advent of the T-72 it would be better to remove all the T-64 from the troops.

      Oh ... here's the article was that the West did not know ANYTHING about the new Soviet developments in the field of tank building, but you now have access to a larger "layer" of normal military-technical literature, read it and you will no longer have such thoughts when you find out the following ..
      - on which tank and when was the full multi-layer reservation, and for how long they couldn’t install it,
      - which of the tanks all the time had the advantage of equipping with an aiming system and had the best OMS and weapons complex, etc., etc. ...
      One T64B is equal to 1,5 T72B in its combat effectiveness ...
    4. svp67
      svp67 1 November 2013 16: 41
      0
      Quote: Echo
      http://topwar.ru/9310-sravnenie-tankov-t-64-t-80-i-t-72-iz-lichnogo-opyta.html

      I’ve read it before and I’m not surprised that the guys who studied the T72 and who have superficial knowledge of the T64 do not think differently, they first put their operational qualities, forgetting that the tank should fight at all, and not just ride ...
      You watch "biathlon", conscripts from 1800 meters smear all three shells, from the spot and these are the best of the best, and this is due to the "primitiveness" of the FCS installed on the T72B, which requires higher training. On the T64 it is easier to train the crew and, accordingly, it is easier to get there - because of the more advanced LMS ...
    5. Abracadabra
      Abracadabra 1 November 2013 22: 22
      -1
      I read one comment from a former tanker with experience on the T-64. According to him, it was the best tank, if properly operated. Often crews who transferred from T-72 to T-64 had problems with overheating of the engine. But this happened because they did not comply with the features of the T-64, it had to always be rolled at high speeds. The whole problem was quality training.
  • Echo
    Echo 1 November 2013 16: 53
    +4
    Quote: Kars
    Et yes, its author was so laughed at here so that he doesn’t stick his nose here with Valor.

    And, in my opinion, they laughed completely in vain. With all that he says, I personally encountered while serving in the Far East. With the T-64, problems arose constantly.
    Quote: svp67
    Did you just "see" them or did you learn to exploit them somewhere?

    No, I had to take them out of the area, which in our latitudes was humorously called "yogurt with a surprise." The unit in which I served was not a tank unit, but in those extremely funny times it came to the point of absurdity - tankers came with a request to pull out their tanks, because it was impossible to pull the T-64 off of the hellish mud even by hooking the BREM-1 to it. Or even two BREM-1s, and therefore they also called us. Taking off her shoes, this "lady on plates" immediately went into the ground up to her belly - the narrow rollers stupidly fell into the ground. Judging by the feedback from the mechanics, it was necessary to drive the T-64 very carefully, because the tracks flew off as if they were a nefg. While such problems never arose with the T-72, in any case, there was not a single case in my memory.
    Quote: svp67
    Oh ... here the article was that the West did not know ANYTHING about the new Soviet developments in the field of tank building

    And I also started with this, putting forward my own version of why the T-64 remained a "dark horse" for the West for so long. I repeat: in my understanding, it was all because this tank was not advertised, and was not sold to anyone. The rename of the domestic tank industry would have suffered too much if these tanks had to fall into the hands of the foreign allies of the USSR.
    Quote: svp67
    One T64B is equal to 1,5 T72B in its combat effectiveness ...

    I noticed.
    1. Kars
      Kars 1 November 2013 16: 57
      +1
      Quote: Echo
      And, in my opinion, they laughed completely in vain. With all that he says, I personally encountered while serving in the Far East. With the T-64, problems arose constantly.

      But mine wasn’t in vain. And how much is it all the time? And were the T-72 exploited near you and there were no problems with it?
      Quote: Echo
      if these tanks had to fall into the hands of foreign allies of the USSR.

      Well, after the Arab-Israeli wars there was nothing special to suffer there. Yes, and the operation of the T-72 didn’t really raise its reputation.
    2. svp67
      svp67 1 November 2013 17: 08
      0
      Quote: Echo
      Judging by the reviews of the mechanical drivers, it was necessary to manage the T-64 very carefully, because the trucks flew off as for nefeg

      For your information, the tracks cannot go anywhere, these "guys" would be better off watching the tension of the tracks, there would be less problems ..
      Quote: Echo
      . While the T-72 never had such problems,

      Well, yes, there is yours - fingers not secured from the lump did not fly out?
      Quote: Echo
      in my understanding, everything was because this tank was not advertised, and was not sold to anyone. The rename of the domestic tank industry would have suffered too much if these tanks had to fall into the hands of the USSR’s foreign allies.

      These tanks, especially the T64B, were at one time so "advanced" that if they got to our allies, especially the Germans or the Czechs, the retirement of Soviet tank building would have risen by an unprecedented amount. But the fact of the matter is that they were "the very hatches" filled with a secret filling, which in no way should have fallen into the hands of our opponents for the time being ... even information about them.
    3. svp67
      svp67 1 November 2013 17: 10
      +1
      Quote: Echo
      I noticed.

      It was necessary to at least see it and shoot one of them, and not just listen to the stories of soldiers of conscripts ...
  • Sour
    Sour 1 November 2013 17: 26
    +1
    We had T-64 tanks in the division, but if I'm not mistaken, they had 125 mm guns, not 115. Am I confusing anything? 115 mm was like the T-62. Let the tank crew correct.
    1. svp67
      svp67 1 November 2013 17: 49
      +2
      Quote: Sour
      We had T-64 tanks in the division, but if I am not mistaken, they had 125 mm guns, not 115. Am I confusing anything? 115 mm was like the T-62. Let the tank crew correct

      Nothing, everything is correct.
      The first t64 were with the 115mm gun, and with the modification of T64 the 125mm gun went ...
      1. Sour
        Sour 1 November 2013 18: 12
        +1
        I had familiar tank officers, also young people. They were delighted with the T-64 in terms of ease of gear shifting and in terms of firing accuracy. But at least two of them spoke about some features of the cooling system that could lead to overheating of the engine.
        I saw in the division exercises how a skating rink mine was mounted on the T-64. I watched the T-64 at full-time firing. But in general, I’m not a tanker, although I understand a little bit of caterpillar equipment, after all, I’m a mechanical engineer, and I worked as a tractor driver in my school years. Again, in the regiment we had MTLB, talked with them and repaired. Also tracked equipment. smile
        1. svp67
          svp67 1 November 2013 18: 19
          +1
          Quote: Sour
          But at least two of them spoke about some features of the cooling system that could lead to overheating of the engine.

          Overheating of the engine threatens everyone, to a greater or lesser extent. And the t64 uses an ejection cooling system ... without a fan.
          1. Sour
            Sour 1 November 2013 18: 39
            0
            If I correctly understood my comrades, then 5TDF has a peculiar cooling shirt with some channels. The problems were connected with her, and not with the lack of a fan. Although it is clear that any engine has features in operation.
          2. flanker7
            flanker7 10 November 2013 18: 27
            0
            Well, let's say, not everyone, but only diesels. On the T-80, overheating is not possible in principle.
      2. Vereshagin
        Vereshagin 2 November 2013 22: 25
        0
        Yes, and the liner was a brass tray good
  • komissar
    komissar 1 November 2013 18: 29
    +3
    The OdVO tank regiment, in which I had to serve, reequipped from T-1982 to T-55B, T-64B64 in 1, after half a year and mechanics, the drivers and gunners completely mastered the new equipment and passed the test for solid 4. Excellent weapons and OMS. I can now teach one non-tanker how to control fire and shoot a T-64 gun without misses in one day of training (provided that the gun’s sight is brought to battle correctly). The 5TDF multi-fuel engine is really moody, but replacing it is not a big deal. And while this machine was put into service, it really was a miracle of military engineering.
    1. Sour
      Sour 1 November 2013 18: 42
      0
      Quote: komissar
      but replacing it is not a big deal.

      Yes, I also heard that replacing the engine and transmission units in the T-64 is faster and easier than other tanks. All tankers noted this.
    2. max702
      max702 4 November 2013 17: 58
      0
      I can now teach one non-tanker how to control fire and shoot a T-64 gun without misses in one day of training
      Speak in one day .... I always suspected that stories about the complexity of military equipment were just stories, you confirmed my opinion .. For how much I talked with responsible military comrades I couldn’t understand how they could handle complex equipment because it’s unrealistic. . they and sophisticated technique ..
  • Echo
    Echo 1 November 2013 18: 37
    +1
    Quote: Kars
    And how much is it all the time? And the T-72 was operated near you and there were no problems with it?

    In the fall of 1998 alone, there were three or four such cases with the T-64, I don’t remember exactly now. I also remember exactly that a failed or dislocated T-72 was pulled out of the swamp for a sweet soul. It was also quite possible to carry around the T-72, which was loose, on a trailer, while with the T-64 it was absolutely unrealistic - it simply buried in the ground on its plates, as if drowning.
    Quote: Kars
    Well, after the Arab-Israeli wars there was nothing special to suffer there. Yes, and the operation of the T-72 didn’t really raise its reputation.

    Well, it’s already as in that saying: it wasn’t the car, there was a block of wood in the cab. Nevertheless, numerous allies of the USSR had the opportunity to choose: T-64 or T-72. For some reason, everyone chose the T-72. I don’t know the criteria for their ratings, but the very fact of the choice is about something, yes it says! Or do you also explain this with their idiocy?
    Quote: svp67
    For your information, the tracks cannot go anywhere, these "guys" would be better off watching the tension of the tracks, there would be less problems ..

    If they can’t fly, then why did they fly? Or what, with a light hand, will you attribute all the jambs of the design to the human factor? Why didn’t the T-72 fly then, and the tanks successfully kneaded the trenches, and for the T-64 had to dive into these trenches? What, on the T-72, all tankers as one correctly pulled the tracks, and not the T-64 - no?
    Quote: svp67
    Well, yes, there is yours - fingers not secured from the lump did not fly out?

    I don’t know what happened there or didn’t take off - at least about the "grounded" T-72 tanks, the tankers did not tear us away from their affairs.
    Quote: svp67
    These tanks, especially the T64B, were at one time so "advanced" that if they got to our allies, especially the Germans or the Czechs, the retirement of Soviet tank building would have risen by an unprecedented amount. But the fact of the matter is that they were "the very hatches" filled with a secret filling, which in no way should have fallen into the hands of our opponents for the time being ... even information about them.

    Yeah. And on the T-72, nothing like that was even close? There were only a monocle and a coil. Well do not tell me, huh?

    Okay, don't care. We will not prove anything to each other. Let's close this topic.
    1. Kars
      Kars 1 November 2013 19: 27
      +1
      Quote: Echo
      In the fall of 1998 alone, there were three or four such cases with the T-64, I don’t remember exactly now

      N-yes. 1998 tanks probably hit the trash, with spare parts strained.
      The Russian armed forces received about 4000 of these tanks. Due to the fact that the manufacturer turned out to be abroad, the tanks acquired the status of "foreign cars", they were intensively exploited in training units, however, after the resource was exhausted, the "sixty-fours" went not for repairs, but for disposal. And, nevertheless, these four thousand cars were enough for almost 20 years.
      Quote: Echo
      Yeah. And on the T-72, nothing like that was even close?

      It wasn’t talking about the fact that the simplified T-72s were made for imports, not only in armor, but also in the LMS and the lack of guided weapons.
      Quote: Echo
      Nevertheless, numerous allies of the USSR had the opportunity to choose: T-64 or T-72.

      THEY HAD NO OPPORTUNITY TO CHOOSE.
      1. svp67
        svp67 1 November 2013 19: 38
        0
        Quote: Kars
        N-yes. 1998 tanks probably hit the trash, with spare parts strained.

        These are "German" stocks, that is, tanks from the Western Group of arms, they were transferred there in the early 90s, storage bases were arranged right in an open field ... So, maintenance and storage were still there ...
    2. svp67
      svp67 1 November 2013 19: 30
      0
      Quote: Echo
      Nevertheless, numerous allies of the USSR had the opportunity to choose: T-64 or T-72.

      Even the simplest T64A was secret due to the presence of "multi-layer" armor, at the same time, the T72 was supplied abroad with "monolithic" armor, so none of the foreign allies offered anything other than the T72 ...
    3. svp67
      svp67 1 November 2013 19: 34
      +3
      Quote: Echo
      Yeah. And on the T-72, nothing like that was even close? There were only a monocle and a coil. Well do not tell me, huh?

      Just imagine almost that, the T72 did not have a tank ballistic computer (TBV) or a "heap" of other subsystems, or such a perfect sight, which was on the T64, and for a long time could not fire guided projectiles. So, it's up to you to believe it or not, but the truth of life is ...
  • Alex 241
    Alex 241 1 November 2013 19: 52
    0
    Quote: svp67
    Yes, imagine almost that, the T72 did not have a tank ballistic computer (TBV) or a "heap" of others

    Sorry, Sorry for the stupid question: why?
    1. svp67
      svp67 4 November 2013 23: 51
      0
      Quote: Alex 241
      Sorry, Sorry for the stupid question: why?

      The question is natural. But alas, the answer must be sought in "secrecy mode". T72 was positioned as "mobilization" and "export".
      As "mobilization", it was simplified to the "really acceptable minimum", to reduce the cost, which "surprisingly" coincided with the observance of the "secrecy regime" in the supply of military equipment abroad.
      This was a common practice in the USSR. Airplanes abroad, after all, also went "lightweight", without many systems ...
  • BBM
    BBM 1 November 2013 22: 19
    -2
    T-64 the best tank of all time
    1. svp67
      svp67 4 November 2013 23: 44
      0
      Quote: BBM
      T-64 the best tank of all time
      After t80U ....
  • klirens
    klirens 2 November 2013 01: 04
    +2
    Many have read, many have heard, many have seen in the movies. Fuck! But not many exploited it. svp67 and Aleks tv !!!! Remember - recently we were butting on this issue. The reeum was like this - 2/3 everything is determined by the training of the crew. On 1/3 - TTX 64 and 72. On my own I added that the T-64 is the mother of the T-72 and T-80. A revolutionary leap, the apogee of which was the "object 219A", "product Alder" and "object 478B" "Birch". Then there was the victory of the "effective management" of UVZ - the result of which is the disposal of the T-80 and the modernization of the T-72. Worst case. On this, I propose to close this topic forever.
  • Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 2 November 2013 02: 05
    +2
    Quote: klirens
    Fuck! But not many exploited. svp67 and Aleks tv !!!! Remember -

    Sergey, why all this talk? ...
    What the Motherland has given, we serve on that.
    And not humming.

    ps And served normally. On any technique.
    wink
    1. Alex 241
      Alex 241 2 November 2013 02: 07
      +3
      Quote: Aleks tv
      And not humming.
      They will order us, we will fulfill, but we will fulfill and fill drinks
      1. Thunderbolt
        Thunderbolt 2 November 2013 02: 31
        +1
        No, guys, there are no comments on this video. All the guys do a good job "secretly." And then their organs thunder all over the world.
      2. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 2 November 2013 22: 12
        +2
        Quote: Alex 241
        They will order us, we will fulfill, but we will fulfill and fill

        To the point, Sanya.
        repeat
        good
        drinks
  • tomket
    tomket 2 November 2013 17: 32
    +1
    I remember how Rezun walked along the t-64 in his opuses, they say the caliber increased accuracy fell, whether it was up to the soldiers to fight on the t-54, how the shells were pumping up nails, and the t-64 was wasting people's money
  • Vereshagin
    Vereshagin 2 November 2013 23: 09
    +1
    Sixty-four - the car is very decent. For its time - just a breakthrough. "Children's diseases" were. Especially with the engine - it often crashed, when the engine braked due to the “throwing” of revolutions, the supercharger turbine flew. Cured by installing a lock on the wings. Yes, thin rollers without caterpillar tracks towing is possible only on hard ground, but a very soft ride, which ensured a more accurate shooting. And the ability to overcome the ford on B-shke almost on the shoulder straps of the commander’s turret? A stand-alone closed-loop switchgear? And the TPD-2-49 rangefinder? True, in the movement it was difficult to measure range, but the presence of such a device warmed the soul of ordinary Soviet tankmen. Again - the loading mechanism, which provides automatic ammunition selection and a rate of 10 rounds per minute, a powerful stabilizer, multi-layer armor, anti-radiation looting, shells with an initial speed of 850 to 1800 meters per second, when the direct firing range at BOPS on the M-60 was 2430 m !!! After 62 and 55 - it was not a tank, but a song !!!
    Both 64 and 72, each of these machines has its own glorious history, its victories and defeats. The fact that in modern armies they or their descendants are armed indicates that the reserve was good.
  • Tankist su
    Tankist su 4 November 2013 15: 02
    +1
    Good day! As a tank commander, I can say that the sixty-four is an excellent, unpretentious and hardy vehicle. And since I had a chance to serve in a training regiment, the equipment was accordingly exploited to the extreme. The engines, as a rule, worked out their service life, what went out of order was repaired by the forces of a regimental repair company or divisional rembat (with the exception of complex hydraulic gearboxes - repairs only under the conditions of the manufacturer's enterprise). On the undercarriage in the mustache, movement at high speeds failed - the torsion shafts of the suspension burst, (which does not lead to a loss of mobility of the BM) road wheels, gear crowns of the driving rollers. In my practice, there is not a single one! the case of a rupture of a caterpillar track or "blowing off a car, I also have never seen this with my own eyes. The problem of the so-called" narrow skating rink "was discussed in the context of its relevance only in mountainous-rocky terrain, in the forests of sands and swamps of Chernihiv region, where I served, was absent as such.
    1. svp67
      svp67 5 November 2013 00: 10
      +1
      Quote: Tankist su
      unpretentious

      Well, this is definitely not about the T64 ... So to call a car that requires "heating" already at a temperature of +5 ... Don't be ridiculous ...
  • barbiturate
    barbiturate 4 November 2013 16: 16
    +1
    I don’t know what great weaponry stood and fired on the T-64, but in 2006 we were driven with the BHVT by several T-64A training vehicles, naturally not firing, because the tank was already withdrawn from armament and no one would have given fire and couldn’t. Therefore, I can only say from the standpoint of hodovka. The tank was funny, it was fun to rattle, but it wasn’t pleased with the power of 5TDF, it was hard to tow another tank in tow. Started in the cold is bad, had to warm for one and a half to two hours. It was very vibrating on concrete slabs and shaking in pits, small coils, iron and goose crowns were the same, it was disgusting to see the concrete from here (72ka was driving much softer, seeing the size of the rollers and rubber) He also rode through the mud as if worse. In general, he didn’t like our furs of training machines and everyone chose 72ku for driving and towing or just for going to the training ground.
    From more experienced officers I heard for him (T-64) some very liquid mean reviews, such as neither fish nor meat tank
    1. flanker7
      flanker7 10 November 2013 18: 40
      0
      Well, here's what you write about the T-72 chassis - multiply by 10 and get the T-80 ..
      Best MBT
  • DesToeR
    DesToeR 4 November 2013 23: 29
    0
    Not quite the topic, but since "T-64 is the mother of T-72 and T-80", then a question for the specialists. Why did the Russians choose the path of modernization and development of the T-72, and not the T-80? After all, there are also diesel modifications of the T-80 tank, i.e. the shortcomings of the GTE can be ignored.
  • barbiturate
    barbiturate 5 November 2013 08: 03
    0
    Although I am not a specialist directly, I heard the version and many discussed it that in the 90s Yeltsin came to Uralvagonzavod and swore and swore (apparently drunk as usual) that he would not leave his fellow countrymen and that he would do tanks for Russia their plant, and not the Omsk Transmash, will leave exactly the T-72 and its descendants.
    This is not to say that the T-72 is a bad tank, it doesn’t even exist at all, it was just a decent talk on this subject, and here politics intervened together with Yeltsin)
    Well, about Kharkov in general, naturally, there was no question, another country, what tanks are there ...
    1. flanker7
      flanker7 10 November 2013 18: 50
      0
      Yes, I also heard about such a "match" by EBNa. And once again with such a choice in favor of UVZ, we ourselves are sickle in the balls. And here's an example, as an emasculated, to the limit simplified version of the tank became the basis for the new MBT. Not a T-80, even in a diesel version (but I personally only accept a gas turbine engine (talk about efficiency is complete crap, against the background of general expenses).
  • PXL
    PXL 17 January 2017 23: 41
    0
    Originally in the West, the T-64 was known as the "Dvina tank".