Military Review

Order in the tank forces?

230
Received from a friend the other day who visited one of the training units, photo T-90 arr. 1992. and recently arrived early T-90A (2004-2005 release). Despite the fact that the last cars are not even 10 years old, they are very "ushatany". It was striking that the windows of the sights (in particular the commander's “Agatha”) and observation devices were covered with paint. How were these exploited Tanks - absolutely incomprehensible!


Order in the tank forces?



The sighting and observation complex apparently is not needed at all by the commander of the Russian T-90A - the Agata lens is simply overshadowed.



“Lucky” is not only “Agatu” - the anti-aircraft ROM-7 is also painted



The commander on the T-90A is completely blind - except for the sights, he has painted over the usual viewing instruments.



And so painted over the viewing device at the gunner ...



This viewing device on the T-90A was more lucky - it was not painted over, but do you think you can see at least something through it? No wonder that our tanks are "famous" for their blindness, and the saying "Deaf as in a tank" has a wide circulation among the people ...


The degree of their operational readiness causes extreme doubt, not to mention the readiness for battle. But these tanks in the General Staff are considered modern and are regularly inserted into reports in which they talk about the shock rates of renewal of the fleet of military equipment and super-duper rearmament. Apparently, someone not only sights on the sights, but also the eyes (glamorous pink paint) and hands (dollar green). A comrade conveyed that he had again heard from tank crews that the "tractor" - as the Russian army called Tagil machines - are bad in operation. The moment of the field repair of the torsion was filmed. Tankmen say that T-90 is a disease. When driving a car with a cannon turned back, torsions regularly break on the last road wheels. Warriors explain this phenomenon by the fact that the center of gravity is shifting. Do not they know about this at Uralvagonzavod and at UKBTM? Why not take action?


The breakdown of the torsion bar on 6's T-90 rollers is a massive and familiar phenomenon. In the photo - repair in the field.





Actually broken torsion


There was also a complaint about the reverse gear. The tank is not going back! Dissatisfaction was also expressed with regard to AZ. What, allegedly, if his refusal happens, it is not clear what is the reason. And on the MOH T-80, everything is immediately clear, as there are sensors from each charging stage. And from the North Caucasus, I get information about the extremely low engine life on the T-90A tanks. So, for the B-92C2 diesel engine, the resource is declared in 700 hours, however, the warranty time of the engine is two times lower - 350 hours. But often the engines do not reach this deadline. Warriors, this situation, in principle, beneficial. The engine flies ahead of time - its manufacturer changes the warranty without any questions and the tanks are operated further. Therefore, it is not specifically disclosed. The factory manufacturer, too, there is no reason to shout about the poor quality of its engines. But at the same time, according to the logic of things, the plant should feverishly look for a way to remedy the situation.


The B-92X2 engine of the T-90A tank often falls short of the warranty period.


Indeed, such a solution was found - given the political resource of the Corporation, the plant, instead of improving the engine, simply turned the price on it. As a result, even with a warranty replacement, it is not at a loss. On the other hand, the engines returned under the guarantee to the plant, they, too, do not automatically fall into scrap metal, but are sifted, restored and re-launched into circulation along with the new ones. As a result, “peace and quiet, but God's grace” - everyone is happy, everyone keeps quiet. In the loser only the state. It's not a 1937 now?
Also, “tractors” are called recently received brand-new, modernized T-72B3 and in another military unit located in a completely different region. So this epithet seems to be objective, since it is assigned without saying a word. In both cases, people have something to compare: T-72BV and, until recently, were T-90UD in the "training" on a par with the T-80B and T-80 tanks. Well, the combat team just moved to the "tractor" with the "swallows" of the T-80BV.
T-72B3 are criticized not only because of their disgusting mobility - they have a much more significant disadvantage: by fulfilling the customer’s requirements in a formal way - the Russian MO-designer stupidly replaced the old night sight, which was Sosna-U . "Pine" - a magnificent sight, but ... it is worth it is not in place! Being now the main one in its essence (and, by the way, according to operational documents), it is installed without complying with the requirements of ergonomics.
As a result, to work with him, the gunner is forced to take an uncomfortable position and bend the neck. Naturally, this can not continue all the time - a person, even willing to fulfill the requirements of instructions, cannot physically do it anymore - neck muscles ache, blood circulation in the brain is disturbed, with all the ensuing troubles in the form of dizziness, loss of coordination. As a result, the “Pine” gunners prefer not to use (the sighting channel), exploiting the “old” 1А40, which has now become auxiliary, but standing in the “right” place. Let me remind you that each T-72B3 costs Russian taxpayers more than 50 million rubles. It would be necessary to make our generals responsible for modernization, and for one and the designers who carry it out, buy their own money on the "Cruiser" or "Gelendenvagen" and ride constantly with the head protruding from the window leaf .... Maybe it would be smarter then?


The main target tank T-72B3 "Pine-U". If there are no problems with the thermal channel - the “picture” is displayed on the monitor, then it is inconvenient to work with the sighting device - you have to bend the neck.



The auxiliary sight 1А40 on the T-72B3 tank is in its former place, and working with it does not cause any difficulties, unlike the “Sosny-U” which is "near".


No, in fact, is such a disregard for ergonomic requirements - is this normal? Of course not, and the designer is aware of this, but they otbrebayut from themselves in the direction of the MO - they say, as ordered, so done. Not really could not make brains? Why not try to resist the stupid requirements of MO? Under Kartsev, Venediktov and Potkin, for some reason, the KB could firmly defend its ideas and proposals, and now it is completely “under” MO. Satisfying the customer's whim for his money, as an option, is called "prostitution."
PS Now “patriots” will again accuse me of throwing “shit on a fan”, “in a temporary insanity”. Is it time for them to realize that the “posture of the ostrich” will not lead to anything good in the end? And if you continue to hush up the problem - it does not resolve itself. We need urgent and very tough conclusions! The golden words of Lazar Moiseevich Kaganovich, the people's commissar of communications, once said: “Every accident has a name, a surname and a title” ...
Author:
Originator:
http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2013/10/blog-post_2258.html
230 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Victor
    Victor 1 November 2013 09: 11
    39
    The author quite correctly raises the question of the composition and content of equipment and its weapons. There is a reason for everything. So, for example, the shaded windows of observation and aiming devices indicate that combat training with the crews of these vehicles is not carried out in full, are content with the course of firing. The service is very bad. And if ergonomics has questions for designers and design bureaus, then the rest are platoon and company commanders, who need to be driven out of the army for such an attitude to technology with a filthy broom, and at the same time the deputy for the battalion’s armament is also there. All this is sad.
    1. roma2
      roma2 1 November 2013 09: 28
      -34 qualifying.
      It is strange that someone else is buying it.
      "Traktor" is a "Traktor" tank for the crew with 9 classes of education.
      Still with such ecstasy, the suspension and the T-64 engine were blown away, and then there was such a popodos, turned the trunk back and the torsion bar broke, 350 is it often the engine’s operating time that the bums collect it ??
      The level of readiness of your army I dropped below the plinth.

      Congratulations, you can continue to believe one hundred and your army is not defeated, the easier it will be to bring Russia to its knees.
      1. ka5280
        ka5280 1 November 2013 14: 53
        16
        Roma, is your army okay? Torsion tanks do not break? And all the tank crews, like extra-class pick-ups, aces, snipers, and all as one with cut-off peeps?
        1. roma2
          roma2 1 November 2013 22: 15
          -4
          They break down, and tankers with 9th grade education are the norm, and there are many different canoes, but we look soberly at the current situation, and do not engage in self-populism and praising a rather mediocre machine.

          In disputes, your "specialists" always try to charm any tank that at least somehow opposes the T-90, extolling the reliability and efficiency of their vehicle, and here is such a bummer.

          The "main guardian" of the T-90 simply talked about the everyday life of an ordinary military unit, in which the tanks stand for months without crew maintenance, so the glorified suspension turned out to be problematic with
          overloaded feed

          even movement with the barrel on the back causes torsion damage, engines (according to the comments) fail due to correct operation, and this is a "simple and unkillable engine" so why even such a simple engine cannot be mastered by your tankers?

          The engine resource of a 21st century tank is commensurate with the resource of World War II tanks.

          You know, you should throw off the Great Russian arrogance and throw off the halo of the "invincible people" (they were our grandfathers and fathers, and you pissed away this honor) to take a sober look at real events.
          1. Setrac
            Setrac 2 November 2013 00: 05
            -1
            Quote: roma2
            You know, you should throw off the Great Russian arrogance and throw off the halo of the "invincible people" (they were our grandfathers and fathers, and you pissed away this honor) to take a sober look at real events.

            And our great-grandfathers, great-great-great-grandfathers and great-great-greats and great-greats, etc.
          2. Legioner
            Legioner 2 November 2013 01: 58
            0
            That's right, especially about the "halo" and a sober self-critical look.
      2. ka5280
        ka5280 1 November 2013 14: 55
        +1
        And about kneeling, you ask Adolf Fashistovich. He already reached Moscow and burnt in the end. So breathe evenly Roma.
        1. vjhbc
          vjhbc 1 November 2013 20: 51
          11
          that’s why you don’t always take the right criticism and then you are outraged that they will send soldiers to slaughter to fill up with corpses and fill them with blood, isn’t it better to do everything well before the war or you don’t feel sorry for yourself because the trend is 1 war NN Golovin’s calculations, 1939 1 300 war from about 000 to 2, that is, an increase of 12-000 and you are ready to lose from 000 just because you have a capricious mood and two wars in this vein haven’t taught you how much then there will be Russians from 20 to 000 you yourself e regret that even the allies would think you did with such a policy inevitably leads us to the Belarusians to the complete destruction of genocide
          Quote: ka5280
          And about kneeling, you ask Adolf Fashistovich. He already reached Moscow and burnt in the end. So breathe evenly Roma.
          1. ka5280
            ka5280 1 November 2013 21: 04
            +6
            By no means do I support cap-hatred. I am for a trained army and navy. Just a statement that he will put Russia on its knees is fundamentally not acceptable.
            1. vjhbc
              vjhbc 2 November 2013 13: 14
              +5
              Well, of course, I turned down my knees, although there is one bad moment before, our leadership knew for sure that their future is the future of the country and no one will accept them in the West and this was the will to fight, but now I’m not sure about that and whether the Russian leadership will decide the moment of crisis to throw the country after all that they have money in the western banks, at home in England and so on. the children study in the same place, they also come to Russia to download loot and live behind the hill so they can pass it and partisans will crush the quiet without a reliable rear
          2. lelikas
            lelikas 1 November 2013 22: 59
            +7
            Quote: vjhbc
            two wars conducted in this vein did not teach you anything

            As if this did not sound, but the losses of the army are comparable with the losses of the enemy’s army, but the total amount of the dead, together with civilian losses, is terrifying.
            During the WWII, no one fought with the civilian population.
          3. Legioner
            Legioner 2 November 2013 02: 00
            0
            And not only Belarusians but also many peoples in Russia itself!
        2. roma2
          roma2 1 November 2013 22: 19
          -5
          Ask Adolf Fashistovich. He already reached Moscow and burned as a result


          Our grandfathers drove him there, not you. Your generation has shown all that it can in Chechnya. Remind how YOUR generals allowed the Czechs to leave? Built warehouses? Khasavyurt agreement? You now actually keep those who fought against you.
          1. lelikas
            lelikas 1 November 2013 23: 03
            +6
            Quote: roma2
            Your generation has shown all that it can in Chechnya.

            Do not confuse warm with soft.
            The soldiers fought no worse than their grandfathers, but the corrupt leadership of the country and the army (probably sitting in neighboring boilers) showed all its abomination.
            1. roma2
              roma2 1 November 2013 23: 33
              -1
              That is, have you already dissociated yourself from the country's leadership and army command? Yes, you will go far. It remains to divide the country into a select and untranslated.
      3. ytqnhfk
        ytqnhfk 1 November 2013 15: 33
        +2
        the stavilka will hurt and this is all nonsense! crap for youngsters who believe in everything on the teachings, look not at the screen but at the equipment.
      4. aksakal
        aksakal 1 November 2013 16: 11
        +9
        Quote: roma2
        I dropped below the plinth.

        “I don’t understand, Roma, what did you drop below the baseboard?” So in my opinion, it never got up from you. I sympathize ... And I suggest - go to the west, you don’t really need there what you have dropped below the baseboard (but for me, it never really got crushed by you). There you need another device in good condition, which one? - in the West they will quickly explain everything when you arrive.
        It is clear that there are problems and they need to be addressed. It is clear that Gur Khan, an old amateur tanker, laid out for that in order to fix all this, but this is not a reason now to let the whole army down the drain and find fault with it, this is just an excuse to "do a little 1937", so that order aim. Although in 1937, just with the T-34, the situation was just disgusting, and sensible planes appeared not in 1937, but when a roasted rooster pecked well. Before this cock with Messers tried to compete on "Ishaks" there is no other word. About a year before 34-35, it was also I-15 and I-16, delayed with new products - already in Spain I-16 turned into "Ishakov" and became the culprit for the death of many Soviet pilots. And this is only part of the trouble. The main trouble is that having fought with the "Ishaks" in Spain, the Germans came to the conclusion that it was possible to attack the USSR, the equipment sucks! The weapon and the ability to fight should be such that the enemy would not even have a thought to go on an adventure! Today we discussed - for all their dislike for Israel - it is not a sin for them to learn. The Jews' technique and ability to fight at this level, and they constantly show it, so that Assad will be silent and silent, no matter what the Israelis do, but even if they bomb Syria! Although at the same time Assad has a very good Army, one of the strongest Arab armies grinds militants into mince. This is how everyone needs to demonstrate their strength! This is much better than losing 20 million of your daughters and sons later! It is regrettable, but I hope it will get to Shoigu and I think that something will certainly happen to the shoulder straps of the commander where it was discovered!
        Py.Sy. I still can not understand why 1937 is considered a symbol of order in the USSR? I do not see any order that year, moreover, I see the fatal mistakes that I just pointed out. Explain to me, wretched, why are they referring to 1937? Year as year.
        1. svp67
          svp67 1 November 2013 16: 17
          12
          Quote: aksakal
          . Although in the 1937 year, it was just disgusting with the T-34,

          Of course, since it wasn’t even in the project yet, much worse than that ...
          Quote: aksakal
          The main problem is that having fought with the Ishaks in Spain, the Germans came to the conclusion that the USSR could be attacked

          The Germans called the I16 "rat" - a "rat" in our opinion, and among the pilots there was a saying - "Don't drive the" rat "into a corner" I mean, they knew very well that the I16 could "bite" great ...
          1. aksakal
            aksakal 1 November 2013 16: 32
            0
            Quote: svp67
            The Germans called the I16 "rat" - a "rat" in our opinion, and among the pilots there was a saying - "Don't drive the" rat "into a corner" I mean, they knew very well that the I16 could "bite" great ...

            - well, they did not drive, but in the operational space, everything is done. Have you even fought a real rat with a shovel at the ready? And really they tried to first drive her into a corner and only because of that to kill? I sympathize, if they seriously tried - she is really dangerous in the corner, she can jump so that it does not seem a little. And the sore from the bite does not heal for a long time. So, comparing the I-16 with a rat, you only strengthened my opinion ... A little later, the planes that came (after the rooster) Yak-1, Yak-2, Yak-3, "Lavochkin" that five, that seven - these are aircraft worthy ... And if they, these aircraft models, with Pokryshkin and Kozhedub (although Kozhedub preferred the Airacobra), would have fought in Spain, I am sure the Germans would not have approached the USSR for a cannon shot. And so - after all, they decided, a historical fact that is difficult to deny.
            In general, the meaning of the post is about this.
            And in 1937 the T-34s were already tested, their quality was so disgusting that the Americans gave a bad mark. Oil is there from all the cracks, etc. Read the story. Only by 1942 (again the notorious rooster!) Went the very T-34, about which legends are composed. And towards the end of the war, it appeared with a caliber of 85 mm, which is considered a masterpiece of tank building. And in 1937 it was NOT a MASTERPIECE. So why is 1937 considered a symbol of order? What reasons?
            1. user
              user 1 November 2013 17: 14
              +9
              It’s you, my friend, in vain about the I-16, so if you raise the story, then at the end of 41 and the beginning of 42 of them the Baltic Fleet pilots fought pretty well. It is clear that by that time new fighters appeared and the conditions of the battle put forward new requirements. But the main thing in this matter at that time, and in the current skill and level of training of the flight crew.
              What is the use of the fact that in the 41st year the Soviet Army had almost 34 thousand T-2s alone, if no one was engaged with driver mechanics (they saved the engine resource) and the new tanks were in the boxes.
              The training of personnel is even higher than the availability of new equipment, although it should be like the other way around.
            2. svp67
              svp67 1 November 2013 17: 18
              11
              Quote: aksakal
              A little later, the planes that arrived (after the rooster) Yak-1, Yak-2, Yak-3, Lavochkin, which are five, which are seven - these are the aircraft worthy

              The Germans had an interesting scale for evaluating aircraft by "strength", that is, how many shells are needed to "destroy" an enemy aircraft. Our Yaks take a sad first place in it, if I am not mistaken - no more than 3 30mm rounds. Moreover, the Yaks also had a tendency to self-destruct, when speeding was exceeded, which caused the death of many of our pilots and the "landing" of the entire People's Commissariat of the Aviation Industry after the war ...
              So, without embellishment. And you know that in 1943 at one of Stalin's meetings there was a discussion about "resuming production of the I16 aircraft" and the front-line pilots initiated this discussion ... It's good that by that time La5fn appeared and the question was removed ...
              And more ...
              Yak-2 .... - here are decent aircraft.
              This phrase of yours is enough to understand that you know almost nothing about our aircraft industry since the Second World War. Since this aircraft, the Yak2, as well as its development, the Yak4 were only worthy of landfills ... and did not justify the uninvested money and the hope ...
              1. aksakal
                aksakal 1 November 2013 20: 39
                +1
                Quote: user
                Are you my friend in vain about I-16 so

                Quote: svp67
                This phrase of yours is enough to understand that you know almost nothing about our aircraft manufacturing since WWII

                - I wonder if you read the posts carefully? Did I claim that these are bad planes? I argued that by the time of real combat clashes, these aircraft had already become obsolete, that's all. They weren't bad, they were just the previous generation. It's like fighting the MiG-23 now. For any reason, the MiG-23 is a good plane for its time, but to fight with them now is only to introduce the enemy into temptation - and should I not go to Russia? But did it happen or not? Why didn't they shy away from the USSR after Spain? I just said that. Okay, with your YAK-2, there are also unsuccessful models, I confess I did not know such details to such subtleties, and I was not particularly interested, I am more of a lover of modern technology, and what you demand is more for lovers of the history of military equipment, I am not one of those. I am simply stating the fact exactly as it happened. And I tell you again - they would have kicked the Germans' asses in Spain - in 1941 everything would have been different. And once again I tell you - you need to look for an excuse to kick ass to everyone, especially the so-called. probable opponents, and in such a way that it would not lead to the escalation of the conflict, but at the same time that everyone would already know by the nature of "kick ass" what will happen if you seriously poke yourself! For example, the Yak-3 was recognized as a good aircraft. What prevented you from keeping up with the Germans? Why didn't Yak-3 appear at the same time as Messerschmitt? Why bother and turn the I-15 into I-16, if already according to the global trends in aircraft construction, it was clear where the design thought needed to go? Or were these trends not tracked at all? Then again the question - what does 1937 have to do with this, if this year they allowed themselves to do nothing, not track anything and continue to follow some of their erroneous theory? - Rumor has it that for "Ishakov" due to their some home-grown theory of air combat.
                And therefore, the conclusion on the SABZh - if the enemy's intelligence reports on such "combat readiness", and even accompanies them with similar photos, then, you must agree, the temptation arises. Do you need it?
                Py.Sy. True, bungling is sometimes beneficial. For some heavy new Soviet tank, the hatch was forgotten to be tempered, and German intelligence whistled it. The Germans could not even think of the idea that one could be so "stupid" that would send this tank for testing in real combat conditions with a "raw" hatch. As a result, the Germans made a decision that led them to heavy losses. Well, one cannot hope that it will come out just this way. This is an exception. And if this becomes not an exception, but a tradition, then Gur Khan's indignation can be understood. Why paint over sights? Kill me - I don't understand! Although I understand - he served. But you must understand - when I served, we understood perfectly well that no one would attack the USSR - there were simply no such idiots in the world! And because, well, sorry, honestly, we were a little "do not care". But now with Russia, everything is far from being so obvious that, like, “you cannot attack it,” and therefore, being “indifferent to the present time, especially in relation to COMBAT equipment - this should be under the threat of the TRIBUNAL!
                1. lelikas
                  lelikas 1 November 2013 21: 16
                  +2
                  I-16 fought in Spain with 109 almost equal, 109e also evolved throughout the war, everything was decided by a more powerful engine.
                  Our designers, however, did not receive a powerful in-line aircraft engine until the end of the war. Kurt Tank, creating the 190th, relied, inter alia, on the experience of I-16.
                  1. Legioner
                    Legioner 2 November 2013 02: 02
                    0
                    And where does the T21 90 tank and the plane of the last war come from?
                2. Pilat2009
                  Pilat2009 1 November 2013 21: 31
                  0
                  Quote: aksakal
                  For example, the Yak-3 is recognized as a good aircraft. What prevented keeping up with the Germans?

                  Read M. Solonin- "At peacefully sleeping airfields"
                  It’s well described as Polikarpov’s gnats and inserted sticks into the chassis.
                  1. allim
                    allim 4 November 2013 14: 15
                    0
                    Yes, my friend, well, you chose the authority of Solonin better than Goebbels at once one field of berries
                3. svp67
                  svp67 1 November 2013 21: 34
                  +7
                  Quote: aksakal
                  Why did not the YAK-3 appear at the same time as Messerschmitt?

                  Somehow you look at things strangely ...
                  Serial YAK-3 appeared on the fronts of World War II at the height of the summer battles of 1943 of the year. Almost simultaneously with the appearance of the next modification of Messerschmit Bf.109G and a little earlier Bf.109K
                  Why suffer and turn the I-15 into the I-16, if you could already see where the design idea had to go according to the global aircraft industry trends?
                  Well, my friend, here you are in general, it would be better to be silent ... If there weren’t 16, we would not have other planes. I16 the first production fighter - a monoplane with retractable landing gear in the WORLD ... Does this tell you something?
                  1. Alex 241
                    Alex 241 1 November 2013 21: 39
                    +4
                    Quote: svp67
                    Why suffer and turn the I-15 into the I-16, if you could already see where the design idea had to go according to the global aircraft industry trends?
                    We walk in a circle, no matter how beautiful and revolutionary a glider is. An airplane is nothing without a good engine.
                4. svp67
                  svp67 1 November 2013 21: 44
                  +3
                  Quote: aksakal
                  What prevented keeping up with the Germans?

                  Technical lag for decades.
                  What do you think our country was "friends" with the Germans from 1939 to 1941 out of pure altruism? Yes, we "pumped" all new technologies, equipment, new items of military equipment from them and immediately tried to put it on stream. Well, that China now ... You can think of a lot of things, but for the release, an industrial and technological base is required, which in the USSR was just going through the process of formation.
                5. REZMovec
                  REZMovec 1 November 2013 23: 40
                  +1
                  For example, the Yak-3 is recognized as a good aircraft. What prevented keeping up with the Germans? Why didn’t the Yak-3 appear at the same time as Messerschmitt? Why suffer and turn the I-15 into the I-16, if you could already see where the design idea had to go according to the global aircraft industry trends?

                  For starters - the I-15 biplane and could not evolve into the I-16 monoplane. The further development of the I-15 was the I-15 bis, then the I-152, and the I-153 Chaika, the most maneuverable fighter in the world, became the "pinnacle of biplanes". All these aircraft were produced in parallel with the I-16, the development of which also did not stand still. All our trouble is in MOTORS and upstarts. The Yak-3 is the lightest fighter of the Second World War (of the modern, of course). But for lightness and speed, I had to pay with strength - in a dive, in sharp turns, the plane simply fell apart - wings, tail fell off ... The resource of the glider was designed for a maximum of 50 battles. Often the car could not withstand even half of the resource ... You try to destroy Ishachka like this))) Polikarpov was the "KING OF FIGHTERS" not in vain, and Yakovlev was an upstart. He did not have really "breakthrough" cars - all the Yaks were distinguished by good aerodynamics and unimportant strength. Perhaps his most successful aircraft is the Yak-9.
                  1. Alex 241
                    Alex 241 1 November 2013 23: 55
                    +1
                    Quote: REZMovec
                    But for lightness, speed had to pay strength - in a dive, steep turns the plane just fell apart - wings, tail fell off.

                    The monoplane has two consoles of the same wing, and why they fell off, look on the Internet, a purely conspiracy. Il-2 had problems with the tail.
            3. Pilat2009
              Pilat2009 1 November 2013 17: 24
              +3
              Quote: aksakal
              And in 1937 it was NOT a MASTERPIECE

              Defects are detected by exploitation. You probably want to get a masterpiece of mechanical engineering with a wave of a magic wand. And 37 years will not help
              As for the donkeys, they successfully fought in 41, the whole thing is in tactics of application
              Yes, and Messer 41 years is far from the one that was at 37 ...
              In general, of course, in terms of ergonomics, the Germans were ahead, on La-5, for example, the temperature in the cabin reached 50 degrees ....
              The evolution of technology is inextricably linked with engine building — all aircraft engines until the middle of the war — forced versions of the French ancestors of the 30s ... They learned how to make engines — and they received both the T-34 and Yaki
              1. lelikas
                lelikas 1 November 2013 22: 46
                0
                Quote: Pilat2009
                In general, of course, in terms of ergonomics, the Germans were ahead, on La-5, for example, the temperature in the cabin reached 50 degrees ....

                On the FW-190, this was no better with the A-5.
            4. svp67
              svp67 1 November 2013 17: 25
              +2
              Quote: aksakal
              And the 1937 T-34 were already tested, to

              DON'T MIX .... No better - evidence ...
              1. aksakal
                aksakal 1 November 2013 20: 50
                0
                Quote: svp67
                DON'T MIX .... No better - evidence ...

                - so, wait, in 1937 they were not even in the project - according to your version, but in 1941, and in the first half there were already about 2 of them. Well, I ask you to tell how we managed to carry out R&D on the best tank in the world in the future, conduct full-blooded tests, finalize the test results and launch serial production, and release a whole bunch of them, and all this in 000 years. If I believe it, tell us right away why then only R&D on Armata, together with running the technology on the 3,5th, takes the second ten years? And believe me, before the series still stomp and stomp. The version that "now everything is more complicated, the technique is more complicated" does not channel - but now computers instead of a drawing board and accounts, if calculations and mathematical models - the computer will work for you with pleasure and will not ask for bread, not like then, all with your own hands and with your own head ... I’m not going to prove anything, I’m just exhibiting this logic, and you’ll prove where the tank came from in 195 years. laughing Your version is this - you and voice.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 1 November 2013 21: 10
                  +1
                  Quote: aksakal
                  Well, I ask you to tell us how they managed to conduct R&D on the best tank in the world in the future, to conduct full-blooded tests, refine them according to the test results and launch serial production, and release a whole bunch more of them and all this in 3,5 of the year.

                  Quote: aksakal
                  I won’t prove anything, I’m just exposing this logic, and you’re proving where the tank came from in 3,5; in your finished form, your version is as follows - you are voicing it.

                  Lord, this topic has already been studied and described so much that it’s not necessary to repeat it somehow, it’s better to read it yourself here, or something
                  http://www.litmir.net/br/?b=104797&p=1
                  1. aksakal
                    aksakal 1 November 2013 21: 25
                    +1
                    Quote: svp67
                    http://www.litmir.net/br/?b=104797&p=1

                    read, read, now remembered. By the way, I read this article a long time ago, I have already forgotten it. Well, the guys are reactive - the idea and the prototype in 1937 - mind you, I pointed out 1937! And there was already a copy, and a full serial release by 1941! The creators of Almaty to the count! At least ten years have already been created and two more years to wait before the series! And this is with computers, with special software! Do they work there two hours a day? And the team is rather big. No, persuaded, I agree with you and Gur Khan - 1937 - that's cool! Accelerates well. Need 1937.
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 1 November 2013 21: 53
                      0
                      Quote: aksakal
                      read, read, now remembered. By the way, I read this article a long time ago, I have already forgotten it. Well, guys are reactive - an idea and an experienced copy in 1937 - mind you, I pointed out 1937 year!

                      Well, that's real - I look in the book, but I see ...
                      So, with some minor differences, the same picture is drawn on the whole in both editions: in October 1937 of the year, plant No. 183 (this number was received by the Kharkov Steam Engine Plant named after Komintern in the second half of the 1936 of the year) received from ABTU RKKA the task of developing a new wheeled-tracked tank BT-20.

                      By the middle of 1939 year prototypes of both tanks were manufactured and submitted to the State Commission, but none of them were preferred. However, new tests and the experience of the Soviet-Finnish war confirmed the advantage of purely tracked vehicles.

                      This is brief, but even this is not T34
                      The assembly of the first A-34 was completed in January 1940 of the year, the second - in February. And immediately began the military tests, the course of which was reflected in the reports.
                      1. aksakal
                        aksakal 1 November 2013 23: 14
                        0
                        Here you clearly give preference to one of the versions of the history of creation, and there are several of them.
            5. svp67
              svp67 1 November 2013 17: 28
              +1
              Quote: aksakal
              Only to 1942 (again the notorious cock!) Went the very T-34, about which legends are composed.

              Alas, here you did not guess, all this happened no earlier than the 1944 of the year, and 1942 - the most disastrous year, regarding the quality of the release of T34 ...
            6. roma-belij
              roma-belij 1 November 2013 20: 33
              +1
              If you think the I-16 sucks for 37-39 years, then read the memoirs of Spanish pilots. They called them "Moskas" (midges), but they never responded badly, fought them splendidly, and lost only when the enemy was outnumbered.
              1. aksakal
                aksakal 1 November 2013 20: 59
                +1
                Quote: roma-belij
                If you think the I-16 sucks for 37-39 years, then read the memoirs of Spanish pilots. They called them "Moskas" (midges), but they never responded badly, fought them splendidly, and lost only when the enemy was outnumbered.

                - Above noted that these were GOOD aircraft, they were just stupidly outdated, just outdated. You don’t even have to prove it. Just look at the look of Messer and the I-16. Why did the global aircraft industry not follow the path of a barrel-shaped case, like the I-16? And by the way, not all Vietnamese fought on the MiG-21s that were new at that time, most of them fought on the already obsolete MiG-19s and even MiG-17s. And according to statistics of battles with the Phantom with the superiority of the MiG-21, these old MiGs did not have superiority over the Phantom - but something I did not hear the curses of the Vietnamese pilots against the MiG-19 and MiG-17. Maybe because it’s not customary to scold what you’re fighting? And it is right. But the designers ’job is to draw the right conclusions. And even more precisely - to predict these correct conclusions and already DESIGN in such a way that ... Well, you understand the idea.
                1. Alex 241
                  Alex 241 1 November 2013 21: 01
                  +2
                  Quote: aksakal
                  Just look at the look of Messer and the I-16. Why did the global aircraft industry not follow the path of a barrel-shaped case, like the I-16?
                  What engine cooling does the Me-109 and I-16 have?
                2. svp67
                  svp67 1 November 2013 21: 13
                  +5
                  Quote: aksakal
                  Why did the world aircraft industry not follow the path of a barrel-shaped case, like the I-16?

                  Yes?
                  And what is this "optical illusion of sight"?







                  1. Alex 241
                    Alex 241 1 November 2013 21: 26
                    +2
                    Everything is correct Serezha airplanes with an air-cooled engine. On Fokker another innovation: engine automation.
                  2. aksakal
                    aksakal 1 November 2013 23: 10
                    0
                    Beautiful airplanes. But what does the I-16 look like? Come on, I agree, if there weren’t I-16 there wouldn’t have been more advanced aircraft. Again, the main reason was also indicated - in the aircraft engine. But again, you prove to me that the I-16 at that time was a better aircraft than the ME-109? But he was not better. That's the whole story, why is there a dispute to breed? The result was that Germany DECIDED. Or isn’t it?
                    1. Pilat2009
                      Pilat2009 2 November 2013 00: 33
                      0
                      Quote: aksakal
                      That I-16 at that time was a better aircraft than the ME-109? But he was not better

                      Not at all. In aviation of that time, the year was already a lot to decide. Each plane had strengths and weaknesses - the donkey had maneuverability, the Messer had speed. Yes, and at different heights, the engines behaved differently. It can’t be a motor sharpened by 5000 m so same for 2000 and vice versa.
                    2. lelikas
                      lelikas 2 November 2013 18: 23
                      0
                      Quote: aksakal
                      But again, you prove to me that the I-16 at that time was a better aircraft than the ME-109? But he was not better. That's the whole story, why is there a dispute to breed? The result was that Germany DECIDED. Or isn’t it?


                      In order not to leave the line of argument - in the year 37, in the sky of Spain, I-19 and Bf.109 fought on equal terms. And This could NOT influence the decision to start a war.
                      In the summer of the 41st year, a completely different plane fought with Ishachki (this means its characteristics).
            7. Abracadabra
              Abracadabra 1 November 2013 23: 06
              +4
              Hitler drew conclusions about the combat effectiveness of the Red Army on its experience in Finland and the Stalinist purges of officers, and not on Spain.
              1. aksakal
                aksakal 1 November 2013 23: 17
                -1
                Quote: Abra Kadabra
                Hitler drew conclusions about the combat effectiveness of the Red Army on its experience in Finland and the Stalinist purges of officers, and not on Spain.

                - more precisely, everything in the complex - and Finland, and the direct clashes of the Germans themselves with the Soviet military. And as for the cleanings - here just amplification happened. The fifth column, at least in the Army, was almost completely erased - and this weakened the Army so much?
            8. REZMovec
              REZMovec 1 November 2013 23: 18
              +1
              A little later, the planes (after the cock) Yak-1, Yak-2, Yak-3, Lavochkin, five or seven - these are worthy planes. And if they, these aircraft models, with Pokryshkin and Kozhedub (although Kozhedub preferred the Airacobra), would have fought in Spain, I am sure the Germans would not have approached the USSR for a cannon shot. And so - after all, they decided, a historical fact that is difficult to deny.
              In general, the meaning of the post is about this.
              And in 1937 the T-34s were already tested, their quality was so disgusting that the Americans gave a bad mark. Oil is there from all the cracks, etc. Read the story. Only by 1942 (again the notorious rooster!) Went the very T-34, about which legends are composed. And towards the end of the war, it appeared with a caliber of 85 mm, which is considered a masterpiece of tank building. And in 1937 it was NOT a MASTERPIECE.


              Dear AKSAKAL! Here you are stubborn !! But not always, see above, accurate. The Yak-1 appeared in the 40th, the Yak-2 in the 41st, but this is not a fighter, but a light transport aircraft with two M-11 engines from the U-2, to replace which it was created. Yak-3 in 44th. La-5 appeared at the end of 42, when they were able to bring the M-82 engine to the slightest degree of reliability ... I repeat - the motors are our "Achilles' heel". Look at what beautiful "licked" our planes, tanks, but the motors are weak and therefore the "angular" "Fritz" and "ugly" Americans (I don't think "Cobra" and "Mustang D") are more high-speed, power-equipped ... m T-37 was not yet even on paper. He got to the Americans for testing only in the 34nd. PLEASE READ THE STORY CAREFULLY ...
              1. Alex 241
                Alex 241 1 November 2013 23: 23
                +3
                Quote: REZMovec
                m (although Kozhedub preferred Airacobra),
                Kozhedub is just on La-5, and Pokryshkin is on Cobra.
                1. REZMovec
                  REZMovec 2 November 2013 03: 26
                  +1
                  Alex 241! This is not my quote - Aksakala. I will not make such a mistake in a coma - the biographies of both pilots are quite well studied by me. Pokryshkin flew on I-16, MiG-3, Yak-1, Aero-cobra with airborne No. 13 and 100. Kozhedub on La-5, La-5FN, La-7 with airborne No. 27 (now he is in the museum)
            9. cdrt
              cdrt 2 November 2013 00: 36
              +1
              Quote: aksakal
              Quote: svp67
              The Germans called the I16 "rat" - a "rat" in our opinion, and among the pilots there was a saying - "Don't drive the" rat "into a corner" I mean, they knew very well that the I16 could "bite" great ...

              - well, they did not drive, but in the operational space, everything is done. Have you even fought a real rat with a shovel at the ready? And really they tried to first drive her into a corner and only because of that to kill? I sympathize, if they seriously tried - she is really dangerous in the corner, she can jump so that it does not seem a little. And the sore from the bite does not heal for a long time. So, comparing the I-16 with a rat, you only strengthened my opinion ... A little later, the planes that came (after the rooster) Yak-1, Yak-2, Yak-3, "Lavochkin" that five, that seven - these are aircraft worthy ... And if they, these aircraft models, with Pokryshkin and Kozhedub (although Kozhedub preferred the Airacobra), would have fought in Spain, I am sure the Germans would not have approached the USSR for a cannon shot. And so - after all, they decided, a historical fact that is difficult to deny.
              In general, the meaning of the post is about this.
              And in 1937 the T-34s were already tested, their quality was so disgusting that the Americans gave a bad mark. Oil is there from all the cracks, etc. Read the story. Only by 1942 (again the notorious rooster!) Went the very T-34, about which legends are composed. And towards the end of the war, it appeared with a caliber of 85 mm, which is considered a masterpiece of tank building. And in 1937 it was NOT a MASTERPIECE. So why is 1937 considered a symbol of order? What reasons?


              The T-34 was not a masterpiece at all, in the sense it was not the most advanced tank in any of the indicators. Especially considering our workmanship.
              But in terms of the totality of qualities, and the fact that he preserved this cumulative harmony even with the absolutely disgusting quality of mass production in the conditions of mobilized industry, he had no equal.

              By the way, this is applicable not only to the T-34.
              The Panther exceeded the Pz-IV in each of the parameters, but the four were the more harmonious machine adapted for military production.

              So it is with the Americans. The Panther exceeded the Shermans of all versions, but the Sherman was reliable, unpretentious, and most importantly it was possible to produce 8 times more Panthers.
              1. Alex 241
                Alex 241 2 November 2013 00: 50
                +4
                Quote: cdrt
                The T-34 was not a masterpiece at all, in the sense it was not the most advanced tank in any of the indicators. Especially considering our workmanship.
                But in terms of the totality of qualities, and the fact that he preserved this cumulative harmony even with the absolutely disgusting quality of mass production in the conditions of mobilized industry, he had no equal.

                Can you tell him in the eyes? About Sherman: recognized as the most reliable tank in peacetime.
                1. Aleks tv
                  Aleks tv 2 November 2013 22: 21
                  +2
                  Quote: Alex 241
                  Can you tell him this in the eye?

                  Not in the eyebrow, but in the eye, Sanya.

                  And it’s better ... shove it into the T-34 and send it to the Second World War by time machine ...
                  I would definitely grab my head.

                  And THEY ARE WINS ...

                  I don’t understand - HOW ...?!?!?! Flint, not people.
                  Respect with a capital letter.
            10. tomket
              tomket 2 November 2013 17: 29
              +1
              our pilots and-16 never called a rat, donkey yes, no rat. Collect less rubbish. what kind of t-34 in 1937. Do you want to tell us here ???? The order to put the T-34 into serial production was signed by the Defense Committee of 31 on March 1940 of the year, in the adopted protocol it was ordered to immediately put it into production at plants No. 183 and STZ. Plant No. 183 was ordered to make the first experimental batch of 10 tanks by the first of July. Or do you want to say that Koshkin, like Porsche, ripped a lot of t-34 in advance bypassing the People’s Commissariat ?????
            11. Tourist Breakfast
              Tourist Breakfast 2 November 2013 23: 19
              +1
              (although Kozhedub preferred "Airacobra"),

              Pokryshkin flew in "Airacobra". Kozhedub - on La-7.
            12. samoletil18
              samoletil18 4 November 2013 21: 47
              +1
              Yak-2 (Yak-4) was an unsuccessful aircraft. T-34 arr. 1937 was an ersatz tank of the war economy, developed just in case. It seems that even concrete was proposed to be used in the manufacture of the body. It was just in 1937 that it became clear that humanism and the cause of peace had to be fought with the internal enemy. Then there were also their Serdyukovs.
            13. yastr
              yastr 6 November 2013 16: 22
              0
              Because in the 37th they called for responsibility of those who fixed the riots in the 20s ..
            14. i.xxx-1971
              i.xxx-1971 29 November 2013 17: 43
              0
              Kozhedub flew only on domestic cars, Pokryshkin flew on "Airacobra". The I-16 was fully operational and modern for its time, which was proved by our pilots. For example, Golubev was able to shoot down two Messerschmites on the I-16 in one battle. And the German Air Force in general until 1936 consisted of biplanes: the pilots were afraid to board a plane with a pressurized cabin. Yes, we lagged behind Germany, which is more industrialized. But we learned very quickly, and fought always better. As for the T-34, it is not for the Americans to criticize it, they did not learn how to make good tanks throughout the war. They criticized the torsion bar suspension, clutch, oil filter, cramped turret, poor visibility, rough armor handling and engine build quality. But they were delighted with the gun and the sight. They did not understand that the highlight of the T-34 is its concept, which today is the basis of world tank building. All other shortcomings were eliminated during the war.
              1937 is by no means a symbol of order. An ordinary year. Probably some fighter for the freedom of the Russian people, a great writer, had their grandfather slapped for the cause, and he decided to write a book about it. About my grief, about 1937. Like "Children of the Arbat". So they glorified.
          2. cdrt
            cdrt 2 November 2013 00: 28
            0
            Quote: svp67
            Quote: aksakal
            . Although in the 1937 year, it was just disgusting with the T-34,

            Of course, since it wasn’t even in the project yet, much worse than that ...
            Quote: aksakal
            The main problem is that having fought with the Ishaks in Spain, the Germans came to the conclusion that the USSR could be attacked

            The Germans called the I16 "rat" - a "rat" in our opinion, and among the pilots there was a saying - "Don't drive the" rat "into a corner" I mean, they knew very well that the I16 could "bite" great ...


            He could only bite with the illiteracy of the German enemy. If they acted according to the tactics of battle on the vertical (i.e., they correctly used the advantage of the 109th), the I-16 had no chance. Only if the Germans fell into close combat on the horizontal
            1. Alex 241
              Alex 241 2 November 2013 00: 38
              +3
              About Safonov, look, at the beginning of the war I flew on I-16
              1. Thunderbolt
                Thunderbolt 2 November 2013 00: 55
                +2
                With the outbreak of World War II, he distinguished himself in air battles with the Luftwaffe. There are legends that the Germans broadcast a special message: “Safonov in the air,” which meant that German planes were supposed to return to the base. By early January 1942, B. F. Safonov was awarded two Orders of the Red Banner (July 14 and December 22, 1941). September 15, 1941 seven fighters led by Safonov entered the battle with 52 enemy vehicles. The result of the battle was 13 enemy aircraft shot down, and our seven returned to their airfield without loss. On September 16 of the same year, he was awarded the title Hero of the Soviet Union. A month later, the Air Force command entrusted Major Safonov with the newly formed 78th Fighter Aviation Regiment. On January 22, 1942 B.F. Safonov was awarded the third Order of the Red Banner, and in early March 1942, four North Sea pilots (and among them B.F.Safonov), the head of the British mission, Lieutenant General McForlan handed the highest aviation order of Great Britain - Cross “For Outstanding Merit”.
                On May 30, 1942, the Guard, Lieutenant Colonel B.F. Safonov, already the commander of the 2nd Guards Red Banner Air Regiment, flew at the head of the fighter link to cover the caravan of PQ-16 ships going to Murmansk. During the battle with superior enemy forces, the link broke up, and B. Safonov was left alone. He broadcast on the radio that he had shot down three Ju 88 bombers, after which the connection with him was cut off. His last words were: "The motor is knocked down, I go to the compelled." The exact cause of the death of Safonov is unknown. According to one version (later declared official), his "Kittyhawk" crashed due to engine problems. It is also possible that Safonov’s plane was shot down by the defensive fire of bombers, which was recorded in the operational summary of the 2nd GKAP on May 30. Sailors from one of the ships saw how a single Kittyhaw moved into a steep peak, crashed into water and quickly sank.
                In total, during the hostilities Boris Safonov made 234 sorties, personally shot down 18 enemy planes and 4 in the group.
                14 June
                1. Alex 241
                  Alex 241 2 November 2013 01: 02
                  +2
                  Hi Lesh, as one movie hero used to say: skillfully they beat a witch.
                  1. Alex 241
                    Alex 241 2 November 2013 01: 07
                    0
                    Curtiss P40 Kittyhawks
                  2. Thunderbolt
                    Thunderbolt 2 November 2013 01: 17
                    +3
                    Sanya, hi! You need to somersault in the air to feel more than you should and FAITH in what you do
                    1. Alex 241
                      Alex 241 2 November 2013 01: 26
                      +2
                      You are always right Lesh!
                      1. Thunderbolt
                        Thunderbolt 2 November 2013 02: 17
                        +2
                        here they are assembled, all the squadrons are singing ... and after a second the headset will send a head, and what kind of setting they’ll write, it’s all about the main thing. The main thing is to cover the troops from air, they go to Berlin, they didn’t spare themselves for such. in Russian, to announce this sky ... the team - .. the guys go to Berlin, than you can do better, and this is IMPORTANT, the tank corps must go, cover as much as you can, but we will not let you down. soldier
        2. REZMovec
          REZMovec 1 November 2013 23: 03
          +2
          About a year before 34-35, it was also I-15 and I-16, delayed with new products - already in Spain I-16 turned into "Ishakov" and became responsible for the death of many Soviet pilots. And this is only part of the trouble. The main problem is that having fought with the Ishaks in Spain, the Germans came to the conclusion that the USSR could be attacked
          I-16 is an excellent maneuverable fighter. Before the appearance in 1939 of "Messerschmitt Bf-109E" Emil ", the superiority was in our car." Ishachk "," Ishak "Polikarpov's car was called loving. No. Therefore, the "verticals" were behind them. By the way, no one could catch up with the "Messer" dive speed ... And, excuse me, who told you that it was the I-16 that gave Hitler a reason to attack the USSR?
      5. e3tozy
        e3tozy 1 November 2013 17: 13
        0
        Do not forget to stock up on ties.
      6. ksan
        ksan 1 November 2013 18: 08
        -1
        Congratulations, you can continue to believe one hundred and your army is not defeated, the easier it will be to bring Russia to its knees.
        The army is part of the people, and OUR people "INVINCIBLE"hence the army too. And the article, as the author put it: "shit on the fan." I am a patriot without the prefix "hurray", although I consider them more necessary (in many ways they win wars) than such "objective hackers". Continuous distortion of facts without specifying specific persons, parts, names.
        “Lucky” is not only “Agatu” - the anti-aircraft ROM-7 is also painted
        Judging by the photo, the tanks are freshly painted, most likely from the repair plant, there I cover the "optics" with lithol and paint everything on top, as comrade Viktor correctly noted above.
        The breakdown of the torsion bar on 6's T-90 rollers is a massive and familiar phenomenon. In the photo - repair in the field.
        "Chassis" in the 90s migrated from 72_s, which was always famous for its reliability and indestructibility. That is, a lot of articles and reviews of real tankers, and not some Gur khan c camera and nameless "disgruntled tractor drivers" And by the way, who of the young "trucks" are on the forum ?? What do tankers really call themselves "tractor drivers" now ?? In my time, all were "TRUCKS" and not "tractor drivers" and "swallow" (or like those who are on "swallows" ??)
        but they are shoveling away from themselves in the direction of Moscow Oblast - they say, as ordered, so done. Couldn't you put your brains on? Why didn’t you try to resist the stupid demands of the Moscow Region?
        The Ministry of Defense does not design tanks and does not indicate where to "move" - ​​to the left or to the right this or that sight or device. It puts forward the requirements of what should be in the tank and what parameters. And the "brainless" tank builders already assemble the tank themselves. It's a pity that they "forgot to ask. "at Gur Khana where you need to put" Sosna-U ".
        On the other hand, the engines returned under the guarantee to the plant, after all, they also do not automatically fall into scrap metal, but are relocated, restored and put back into circulation on a par with the new ones. As a result, "peace and quiet, and God's grace" - everyone is happy, everyone is silent. Only the state is in the loser. After all, now is not 1937?
        I heard that the new 1000-strong engines seem to have problems (like everything new), but not such as to shout "Help! Everything is gone !!" Yes, and the engines that "flew" during the warranty, the plant is obliged to repair "its" money already received, and not ask the state for more. And what does the 37th year have to do with it ??? In 37_m, nothing broke ??? or all to the "wall" should be put ??
        Dissatisfaction was expressed with respect to AZ.
        Also "racing". Who spoke out ?? what is the dissatisfaction ??? For example, I read more flattering reviews compared to the same MH. I am far from thinking that we have no problems in tank building, but THIS (article) is not an objective analysis, but so - whining about "how bad and hopeless we are"
        1. aksakal
          aksakal 1 November 2013 21: 13
          +1
          Quote: ksan
          I am far from thinking that we have no problems in tank building, but THIS (article) is not an objective analysis, but so - whining about "how bad and hopeless we are"
          - I think about the same. About 1937 is about the same as you posted. But I will say for Gur Khan - he is a little emotional, but the "tanker" as a whole is literate, not like Kars (damn it, why did you remember him at night? request How to fall asleep now?) And the soul for the Russian tank building is genuinely sick.
          Quote: ksan
          And the "brainless" tank builders are already assembling the tank themselves. It's a pity that they "forgot to ask" Gur Khana where the Sosna-U should be placed.
          - here it may be that a new product can be inserted into a tank of such a design only this way, nothing else. It can be different, only half of the tank will have to be redone. I'm not a tanker, but a friend stuffs old stylish cars like Pobeda, Moskvich-408 or GAZ-21 with modern stuffing, sometimes the cars turn out to be just chic! But far from everything that the customer wants, it turns out to "stick" into this car. More precisely, you can stick everything, but how much will you have to redo the car? I think the tanks are based on the same principle of modernization, and therefore where they managed to squeeze Sosna-U with minimal alterations, they were stuck there.
      7. REZMovec
        REZMovec 1 November 2013 22: 28
        +2
        Still with such ecstasy, the suspension and the T-64 engine were blown away, and here such a popodos Yes sir! The same mister Khlopotov constantly bothers Kharkov tanks and armored personnel carriers, and here, it turns out, the Tagil residents are no better ... So - the T-64 is an excellent car for professionals, with an excellent engine. For half-educated people - T-90. Your Defense Ministry killed the Leningrad and Omsk schools of tank building, engine building is at zero ... The military-industrial complex has no quality, as if everything was done by the hands of "enemy agents". Also write off the last "80s" and the Russian Federation has no tank troops. "Armata" - ayuuuuuu !!!

        P.S. I'm not gloating, no! VERY SAD TIME WE ALL EXPERIENCE ... Where is the USSR, Marshal Grechko and other not indifferent generals and officers? Ehhhh! ..
      8. old rocket man
        old rocket man 2 November 2013 00: 17
        +1
        Quote: roma2
        Congratulations, you can continue to believe one hundred and your army is not defeated, the easier it will be to bring Russia to its knees.


        While you will put us on our knees, we will put you cancer am
      9. Legioner
        Legioner 2 November 2013 01: 55
        -3
        Well done, Roman, definitely said!
      10. ed1968
        ed1968 2 November 2013 05: 37
        +1
        immediately visible crest negative
    2. Ivan93
      Ivan93 1 November 2013 09: 34
      +5
      There is no deputy now. weapons commander in TR, TB. And the Kyrgyz Republic writes paper all the way.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 1 November 2013 09: 38
        +9
        Papers is yes, pieces of paper is a very necessary and important thing. I remember 11 months in a row I wrote one piece of paper a month with an application for fuel pump. Then he pressed it, and I bought it on my own.
        1. Nayhas
          Nayhas 1 November 2013 09: 56
          +2
          Quote: Spade
          Then he pressed it, and I bought it on my own.

          Can a fuel pump for a tank engine be bought?
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 1 November 2013 10: 00
            12
            Yes, just spit if there are several military units in the garrison.

            But I bought a fuel pump to MT-LBU
    3. pawel57
      pawel57 1 November 2013 21: 20
      +1
      But are there any platoons? I already had them in 96.
    4. Su24
      Su24 6 November 2013 14: 05
      0
      And who will confirm the words of the author of the article?
  2. svp67
    svp67 1 November 2013 09: 27
    29
    Tankers who have moved from the T80BV to any "Nizhny Tagil" tank will initially "hate" the "tractor", since these are very different machines in terms of crew maintenance and many of the work that the crew did not carry out on the T80 with a gas turbine engine, giving this honor to the repair authorities, he will be forced to carry out on "tractors" himself.
    At the expense of the "painted over" optical devices - the full impression that these tanks were in storage for a long time, and now they are sent to the troops. And honestly, the photo does not allow you to fully see it, but it seems that the glasses are covered with "lithol" and paint is already on top of it, if this is so, then there is enough clean rags and a "thin, thin layer" of alcohol-water mixture for wiping ... just necessary work up your sleeves.
    The low resources and reliability of the B-92C have been known for a long time, therefore, the T90 went to our army with the B84, a less powerful but very reliable engine, here it is probably worth remembering the tale of a man who wanted to get a lot from one piece of skin, more and more, hats - what is possible, but who will need them? So it is with the B2 series engine, created according to the "technical solutions" of the 30s of the 20th century, constantly modernized, it has already exhausted its capabilities in terms of modernization and for a long time, 20 years, at least requires replacement, and replacement, that is, but ... not yet "brought to mind", for which my personal "fu" to all the Gorbachevs, EBNs and Serdyukovs ...
    1. Bongo
      Bongo 1 November 2013 09: 43
      14
      You between EBNom and Serdyukov forgot one more surname.
      1. svp67
        svp67 1 November 2013 09: 49
        -2
        Quote: Bongo
        You between EBNom and Serdyukov forgot one more surname.

        Yes, there is SO MUCH that there isn’t enough space ... but if you are talking about GDP, then you don’t have to blame him for this, except for one point, in the person of Serdyukov ...
        1. Bongo
          Bongo 1 November 2013 09: 57
          17
          Westma is a controversial statement. If you look at the dynamics of the development (destruction) of the armed forces, then the greatest losses in this area fell on the last 12 years. And it is doubtful that the supreme commander had no information about the activities of his subordinate.
          1. Avenger711
            Avenger711 1 November 2013 13: 47
            -2
            What are the last 12 years, when everything that was not repaired or decommissioned in the 90s began to crumble into the trash?
            1. Abracadabra
              Abracadabra 1 November 2013 23: 29
              +3
              Everything that is now presented in Russia as new was made back in the 90s and in the 90s (95-99), more modern Russian weapons entered the army than in the years of Puten (see reports and tables of equipment receipt). In general, having so much time (14 years !!!) and hundreds of billions from the sale of resources, it would be possible, if you wanted, to create something more than Skolkovo, develop mechanical engineering, the electronics industry and significantly raise the level of the army.
        2. Larus
          Larus 1 November 2013 11: 40
          +5
          I would like to remind you that we have a presidential country, so 6 types of smerdyukov will continue to be with GDP
        3. goldfinger
          goldfinger 1 November 2013 20: 33
          +4
          Quote: svp67
          Yes, there is SO MUCH that there isn’t enough space ... but if you are talking about GDP, then you don’t have to blame him for this, except for one point, in the person of Serdyukov ...

          The man of "toka toka" came into politics (13 years old), he still needs 12 years to figure it out!
          In honor of his 60th birthday, they watched on TV how he was swimming in the pool and, smiling, said: “I only do what I like.” Very frankly, even too much ...
          Serdyukov would NEVER become Minister of Defense, if not for him. It is completely his, only his responsibility.
          His appointees also do only what they like. At your own expense. Due to your life ..
          When taking office in the spring of 2000, the GDP said: “In Russia, the president is responsible for everything!”
          The unpleasant question has remained unanswered: “are you responsible for everything” - to whom? In front of the people? Before God? Before your own conscience?
          President, did he ever answer for the failure of the protege? Remember Minister Zurabov and the monetization of benefits. Remember Minister Golikova and the purchase of tomographs at a triple price, the production of friendly arbidol, etc. Did Minister Fursenko answer for the disaster of education? The excuse limit ran out long ago. And everyone except Putin understands this. Maybe he understands too, but he has long since "put this understanding with the device" on it!
          It excites me, as well as other Belarusians, as he positions himself as the closest ally! Something alarming from such a union!
    2. Aleks tv
      Aleks tv 1 November 2013 12: 34
      +8
      Quote: svp67
      And honestly, the photos do not give a full look

      I agree with all the comments, Sergey.
      Khlopotov exaggerates.

      And to take a frame of a photo out of context and paint it with "terrible" comments is so ... a frivolous trick that it becomes annoying for a master author.

      Fuck knows, maybe it's special processing and a protective layer on tanks, because it is on the hull (no one noticed?).
      It is necessary to clarify the features of the case, and not to behave like that with the comments to the photo.

      There are indeed problems with the B-92, the engine is damp, but not such that "oh, EVERYTHING IS LOST."

      There are also features for installing Pine-U. He wrote the same thing about it.
      Moreover, his opinion almost copies opinions of tankers that I heard when collecting material about the T-72Б3. But their approach to the problem is different!
      The guys are thinking about the matter, but Khlopotov is waving his hands and wants a scandal.

      An unpleasant aftertaste from distorting facts and a desire to present "fried" material.
      Thus it is possible to describe any photo with any horrors.
      Is not it ? Where is the real story of all cases?
      So I want to say - a slimy journalistic method.
      It is a pity.
      1. Sergey_K
        Sergey_K 1 November 2013 13: 32
        -6
        So can buy engines from damn ho ... s?
        1. Aleks tv
          Aleks tv 1 November 2013 14: 05
          +6
          Quote: Sergey_K
          So can buy engines from damn ho ... s?

          I don’t understand why you said that ...
          And for what...
          request
        2. svp67
          svp67 1 November 2013 14: 38
          +3
          Quote: Sergey_K
          So can buy engines from damn ho ... s?

          God forbid. Their engine is from the 50s of development and is already approaching its "top" point in development, especially since we have a good X-shaped engine, which just needs to be slightly improved ...
          1. aksakal
            aksakal 1 November 2013 16: 20
            +1
            Quote: svp67
            God forbid. Their engine is from the 50s of development and is already approaching its "top" point in development, especially since we have a good X-shaped engine, which just needs to be slightly improved ...

            - ChTZ-shny? It seems that experts praise, like, it can be quite good. And yet - advanced Koreans could not cope with the tank engine. The Russians, at least, have it. And with bringing this ChTZ to mind, it will already be possible to be proud, most importantly, what will be and why.
            The Germans and Yapes also have good diesel engines, it is hard to deny. But the Russians have also mastered GTD technologies. Americans also mastered them, but they do not have diesel engines. Then show me another country where TWO TANK power technologies are mastered to a lonely degree!
            But there are sores for all tanks, there's nothing to be done. Another thing is why they still have not been fixed?
            1. svp67
              svp67 1 November 2013 17: 35
              +1
              Quote: aksakal
              But there are sores for all tanks, there's nothing to be done. Another thing is why they still have not been fixed?

              It depends on what engines you are talking about. If about the Ukrainian series "TD", then there are design features that were originally incorporated into the engine and can be corrected only by applying new materials and, accordingly, technologies - and there is no money for that ...
              If about ours, then about the engines of the "B" series, I have already said, they have already reached the limit of perfection, and if about gas turbine engines, political will and money are needed, since new gas turbine engines are simply to be launched into series
              1. aksakal
                aksakal 1 November 2013 21: 49
                +1
                Quote: svp67
                If about ours, then about the engines of the "B" series, I have already said, they have already reached the limit of perfection,
                - can you read more from here? Why didn't the "B" series engines manage to overcome the 1500 hp barrier? The resource barrier is also not taken. Are German diesels better? Why did they manage to take both the 1500 strong barrier and the resource barrier? Maybe it's also about new materials? Or was it originally worse modernization potential than the Germans?
                About the X-shaped ChTZ it is also reported that in the format of 1500 horses it has a ridiculous number of hours, when brought to 1800 hp. - even funnier. But with a boost of up to 1200 hp the picture with the clock improves dramatically, but somehow it’s sad again - all people like people drive 1500 and up, we’re alone like suckers at 1. It’s clear that our tanks are lighter with a good reserved space, but 200 hp provided the same engine life and approximately the same fuel consumption for any is better than 1 hp Or isn’t it?
                And yet - if you really like the GTE because of its accelerating characteristics, then here http://supervariator.ru/ there is already a good version of a gearbox with an efficiency of as much as 96% and higher (!!) and with the ability to connect powerful energy storage devices (there is already anything - a flywheel, a gas storage device, an electric battery - by the way, with electromagnetic armor, why not? And there is no need for an auxiliary APU, and in the case of special camouflage and covert movement on this storage device, you can move without any exhaust emissions, etc. In case of need for intensive overclocking, the supervariator makes it possible to combine the torques from two power sources - you will also have overclocking, the T-80 will nervously smoke on the sidelines! There are a lot of options here! But some create interesting things almost on sheer enthusiasm, others do not need it , and they continue to rivet slop diesel engines with the already reached limit, while the tankers dream of a gas turbine engine, “the tank flies on it.” Somehow they did not try to learn about each other and unite effort? After all, there may be a result - as we can see, the brains in Russia still seem to be there. As if you live in different Russia, honestly.
                1. Bad_gr
                  Bad_gr 1 November 2013 23: 43
                  +5
                  Quote: aksakal
                  . Is German a better diesel? Why did they manage to take both the 1500 strong barrier and the resource barrier?

                  Because the engine compartment is twice as large in volume and there you can cram at least a ship engine.
                  But the reservation because of this in the area of ​​the motor board is three times (2cm against ours 7) thinner.

                  upper - Abrams
                  medium - Leopard
                  bottom - Teshka
                  1. aksakal
                    aksakal 2 November 2013 01: 01
                    +1
                    Quote: Bad_gr
                    Quote: aksakal
                    . Is German a better diesel? Why did they manage to take both the 1500 strong barrier and the resource barrier?

                    Because the engine compartment is twice as large in volume and there you can cram at least a ship engine.
                    But the reservation because of this in the area of ​​the motor board is three times (2cm against ours 7) thinner.

                    upper - Abrams
                    medium - Leopard
                    bottom - Teshka
                    - Thank you, convincingly. Well, it is clear that compactness and power are things, albeit compatible, but somehow hardly compatible.
                2. The fat man
                  The fat man 1 November 2013 23: 56
                  +2
                  Have you tested the x engine? and how it happened in practice and not in theory. as a mechanic I’ll say it is easier to exploit GTE than UTB
                  1. Bad_gr
                    Bad_gr 2 November 2013 00: 14
                    0
                    The X-shaped engine was still on the object 187, also completely passed the test cycle on the running object 195.
                    And these engines are a whole family:
                    http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2011/09/blog-post_02.html
                    http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2011/09/2_06.html
                    1. aksakal
                      aksakal 2 November 2013 01: 04
                      0
                      Quote: Fat Man
                      Have you tested the x engine? and how it happened in practice and not in theory. as a mechanic I’ll say it is easier to exploit GTE than UTB

                      Quote: Bad_gr
                      The X-shaped engine was still on the object 187, also completely passed the test cycle on the running object 195.
                      And these engines are a whole family:
                      http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2011/09/blog-post_02.html
                      http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2011/09/2_06.html
                      - But to abandon the dream of a gas turbine engine and comment on somehow my proposal to hybridize the power plant by might? Maybe I'm wrong? It would be interesting to read.
                      1. Bad_gr
                        Bad_gr 2 November 2013 18: 21
                        0
                        Quote: aksakal
                        - But to abandon the dream of a gas turbine engine and comment on somehow my proposal to hybridize the power plant by can?

                        The French on Leclerc stand a diesel engine with a gas turbine engine together. A diesel engine does not work without a turbine, as it does boost in a diesel engine. The generator is on the turbine. And if I understood the text correctly, then the turbine runs on kerosene, and diesel, respectively, on a solarium.
                        In my opinion, a perversion. As it has shown itself in the matter, I have no information.

                        Once our plan was to choose two types of MTOs (with a diesel engine or a turbine), but the idea did not reach its embodiment in metal.
          2. REZMovec
            REZMovec 2 November 2013 00: 17
            +1
            God forbid. Their engine is from the 50s of development and is already approaching its "top" point in development, especially since we have a good X-shaped engine, which just needs to be slightly improved ...

            To bring a little lack of mind. Kharkovites have finished and will now show you nevermind. You couldn’t even make a motor for VAZ - at the state level, you turned to the West for help ... YaMZ switched to licensed Renov soldiers ... Do not forget the V-84 - a deep modernization of the Kharkov V-2.
            Good luck with the B-92 and "Armata". We are waiting ...
            P.S. On me "cons" - to lean on. Enough for the Ukrainians to "drive the blizzard".
            1. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 2 November 2013 10: 43
              +2
              Quote: REZMovec
              Do not forget the V-84 - a deep modernization of the Kharkov V-2.

              And Kharkov engines (5TD, 6TD) are just a modernization of the German Jumo205, developed in the 30's.
              1. svp67
                svp67 2 November 2013 11: 02
                0
                Quote: Bad_gr
                And Kharkov engines (5TD, 6TD) are just a modernization of the German Jumo205, developed in the 30's.

                All the same - DEVELOPMENT ...
                1. Bad_gr
                  Bad_gr 2 November 2013 12: 54
                  0
                  Quote: svp67
                  All the same - DEVELOPMENT ...

                  And with the saying
                  Quote: REZMovec
                  V-84 - deep modernization of Kharkov V-2
                  agree? In my opinion, there is only the same number of cylinders left from the total and the camber between the blocks is 60 degrees.
              2. REZMovec
                REZMovec 3 November 2013 01: 04
                +1
                Quote: Bad_gr
                Quote: REZMovec
                Do not forget the V-84 - a deep modernization of the Kharkov V-2.

                And Kharkov engines (5TD, 6TD) are just a modernization of the German Jumo205, developed in the 30's.


                Someone would argue, but not me. Charomsky took the very idea of ​​the Jumo-205, and did the motor a little differently. Junkers had vertical cylinders and transmitted rotation from two crankshafts to one drive shaft. Charomsky "put" the cylinder block horizontally, and this is much more serious, believe me. The transmission of the rotational motion was carried out on more than one shaft - each crankshaft worked on its "own" side - its final drive. It turned out to be very difficult to balance all this, but the Kharkovites coped.
                1. Bad_gr
                  Bad_gr 3 November 2013 09: 58
                  0
                  Quote: REZMovec
                  The transmission of the rotational motion was carried out on more than one shaft - each crankshaft worked on its "own" side - its final drive.
                  It's a delusion:
                  the engine does not stand along the tank, but across, so power is taken from one crankshaft, only from two sides, and synchronization and transmission of forces from the second crankshaft goes through the internal gearbox of the engine to the first crankshaft.
                  By the way, the gearbox inside the engine has 5 gears, in contrast to the "guitar" T72-90, which has 4 of them (in the T-62 - 3) - this is me about the "extra" parts in the transmission (Ukrainian colleagues " the guitar "of the T-72 transmission is constantly remembered, completely forgetting to mention their own)
                  1. svp67
                    svp67 3 November 2013 10: 40
                    0
                    Quote: Bad_gr
                    This is a misconception: the engine does not stand along the tank, but across, so the power take-off comes from one crankshaft

                    This is a misconception - the selection is from both shafts, it is removed from the side of the exhaust shaft ......
                    Quote: Bad_gr
                    By the way, the gearbox inside the engine has 5 gears, in contrast to the "guitar" T72-90, which has 4 of them (in the T-62 - 3) - this is me about the "extra" parts in the transmission (Ukrainian colleagues " the guitar "of the T-72 transmission is constantly remembered, completely forgetting to mention their own)

                    This mechanism in the engine has its own name - "gear mechanism" and it is made kaa "straight", that is, with a coefficient of "1", in contrast to the "guitar" and you cannot do without it, in contrast to the "guitar", which is more "parasitic", and it adds more extra weight ... And its purpose is wider, since the drives of the turbine and the supercharger are also "connected" through it and the attachment is also connected, so read it ...
                    1. Bad_gr
                      Bad_gr 3 November 2013 13: 26
                      0
                      Quote: svp67
                      This is a misconception - the selection is from both shafts, it is removed from the side of the exhaust shaft ......

                      You kind of argue with me, but in other words write the same thing as me.
                      I answered this statement:
                      Quote: REZMovec
                      The transmission of the rotational motion was carried out on more than one shaft - each crankshaft worked on its "own" side - its final drive.
                  2. svp67
                    svp67 3 November 2013 10: 52
                    0
                    Quote: Bad_gr
                    This is ... engine

                    You like that, on one of the sites, posted a photo of a German "opozitnik" "deltoid" form,

                    captured at one of the shipyards ... but can I put it now?
                    1. Bad_gr
                      Bad_gr 3 November 2013 13: 37
                      0
                      Quote: svp67
                      Quote: Bad_gr
                      This is ... engine

                      You like that, on one of the sites, posted a photo of a German "opozitnik" "deltoid" form,

                      captured at one of the shipyards ... but can I put it now?

                      But with 4 crankshafts (like two Kharkov ones on top of each other)

                      1. Bad_gr
                        Bad_gr 3 November 2013 15: 27
                        0
                        Based on Jumo-205 (http://alternathistory.org.ua/seriinyi-aviatsionnyi-dizelnyi-dvigatel-jumo-205-g
                        ermaniya
                        ) was created (in wartime) a 24-cylinder (48 pistons) Junkers Jumo 223, diamond-shaped


                        http://alternathistory.org.ua/malenkii-chetyrekhugolnyi-dizelnyi-aviatsionnyi-dv
                        igatel-jumo-223-germaniya
                2. svp67
                  svp67 3 November 2013 10: 31
                  +1
                  Quote: REZMovec
                  The transmission of the rotational motion was carried out on more than one shaft - each crankshaft worked on its "own" side - its final drive.

                  Dear, learn the materiel ... The power on the BKP is removed from BOTH crankshafts, synchronized mechanisms of the main transmission from the OUTLET crankshaft ...
                  So, an expert on engines you are "NOT GREAT" ...
                  As information, find and download in net - the book "Engine 5TDF. Technical description. Order of the Red Banner of Labor. MILITARY PUBLISHING OF THE USSR MINISTRY OF DEFENSE. MOSCOW 1977"
                  And here is the link, if you suddenly do not find yourself
                  http://rem-battalion.ru/5tdf-tehnicheskoe-opisanie/
                3. svp67
                  svp67 3 November 2013 13: 11
                  +1
                  Quote: REZMovec
                  You could not even make a motor for VAZ - at the state level, you turned to the West for help ...

                  Who are you? USSR with VAZ 2108? So you were part of the Union then, so that you "tortured" the engine together ... and now VAZ has a very good, just wonderful engine VAZ2112 and its modifications ...
                  In general, we come to them for help with car tracks, they come to us - for rocket ... Usual practice. What are they turning to you for?
                  Quote: REZMovec
                  YaMZ switched to licensed Renov row soldiers ...

                  From the Avtodiesel website:
                  Products of the enterprise:
                  family of medium in-line 4-and 6-cylinder diesel engines YaMZ-530 with an output of 120-312 hp Euro-4;
                  family of heavy in-line 6-cylinder diesel engines YaMZ-650 with the power of 362-412 hp Euro-4, Euro-3;
                  two families of V-shaped 6-, 8- and 12- cylinder diesel engines with 150-800 hp, Euro-4, Euro-3, Euro-2, Euro-1, including 70 base models and over 300 trim levels;
                  ten models of 5-, 8- and 9-speed gearboxes;
                  clutch;
                  diesel power units, power plants based on YaMZ engines with the power of 60-315 kW;
                  over 1900 positions of original spare parts for all products of the enterprise.

                  The YaMZ-530 engines were developed by the Avtodiesel Engineering and Design Center with the support of AVL List (Austria), taking into account the many years of successful experience in using YaMZ engines on various equipment in difficult operating conditions.

                  In 2012, the company launched into mass production a heavy in-line engine YaMZ-650 with Euro-4 parameters. The design has been developed and preparation for the production of V-shaped diesel engines YaMZ-6565, YaMZ-6585 Euro-4 under a wide range of equipment has been completed. YaMZ-651 is a Euro-4 standard diesel engine developed on the basis of the basic model of the YaMZ-650 in-line family (technological license of Renault Trucks) jointly by Avtodiesel and Rikardo (Great Britain) specialists. In order to achieve Euro-651 parameters, the YaMZ-4 engine used design solutions such as increasing fuel injection energy, upgrading cooling and pressurization systems, etc. Engines are represented by two basic modifications of the YaMZ-651 (412 hp) and YaMZ-6511 (362 hp).

                  When a country does not want to work for "business", "business" itself tries to survive - a normal practice, there is nothing shameful here
            2. svp67
              svp67 2 November 2013 10: 46
              +1
              Quote: REZMovec
              Enough for the Ukrainians to "drive the blizzard".
              more than you do it yourself, no one will do it ...
            3. svp67
              svp67 3 November 2013 12: 54
              0
              Quote: REZMovec
              To bring a little lack of mind.

              Yes, a little, and in fact, not the engine itself, which has long been successfully used by "civilians", but its subsystems, which is associated with installation in an armored hull - work for a couple of months ...
              Quote: REZMovec
              Kharkovites have finished and will now show you nevermind.

              They have "brought" the Soviet development and have already reached the possible limit, further perfection is already associated with huge capital investments, which your country is not going to do, so I think this is the "swan song" of "Kharkov motors" ...
              1. Kars
                Kars 3 November 2013 12: 59
                +1
                Quote: svp67
                further excellence is already associated with huge investments that your country is not going to do

                What for? 1500 l / s is ready. It remains only to find buyers for it. And if everything is successful and Thailand will take the option, it is quite possible that Oplot will receive 1500 l / s.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 3 November 2013 13: 46
                  +1
                  Quote: Kars
                  What for? 1500 l / s is ready.

                  And then, that the Germans already have 2000 l / s and our 2В16 is ready to give such power ...
                  1. Kars
                    Kars 3 November 2013 13: 53
                    +1
                    Quote: svp67
                    And then, that the Germans already have 2000 l / s and our 2В16 is ready to give such power ...

                    And we are participating in some kind of race? And how someone puts 2000 and we will discuss it. So far, even the Americans did not disperse their turbine to 1800, although they have such a turbine from the very beginning, but for 1500 liters, there is a limiter.
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 3 November 2013 13: 55
                      0
                      Quote: Kars
                      And we are participating in some sort of race?

                      Of course - in the "arms race ..."
                      1. Kars
                        Kars 3 November 2013 14: 01
                        +1
                        Quote: svp67
                        Of course - in the "arms race ..."

                        You (the Russian Federation) can take part in what. And we are not Ukraine. As well as the demand for 2000 hp for the tank. What are these dimensions? What is the fuel consumption? Is it for what weight?
                        by the way vryatli 2000 hp even get armata.
                      2. svp67
                        svp67 3 November 2013 21: 20
                        0
                        Quote: Kars
                        And we are not Ukraine

                        Of course, after you "filled up" the "half of Africa" ​​with "free Soviet weapons", you are NOT. So what, are you selling the BTR4 to Iraq, and Oploty to Thailand ... NO, NO, but we’ll take part somehow ...
                      3. Kars
                        Kars 4 November 2013 17: 53
                        +1
                        Quote: svp67
                        Of course, after you "filled up" the "half of Africa" ​​with "free Soviet weapons", you are NOT.

                        This is not an arms race. And have you heard about the demand in Africa for 2000 hp diesel?
                        Quote: svp67
                        You are NO. So which one, do you sell the BTR4 to Iraq, and Oploty to Thailand?

                        And imagine
                        Quote: svp67
                        And then, the Germans already have 2000 l / s and our 2B16 is ready to give such power

                        doesn’t interfere.
  3. Avenger711
    Avenger711 1 November 2013 13: 56
    0
    And what did he say wrong? What can not solve the obvious and not so difficult problem? I would also use obscene wings. And the B-92 is not a year or two.
    1. old rocket man
      old rocket man 2 November 2013 00: 07
      0
      Quote: Avenger711
      What can not solve the obvious and not so difficult problem?

      Well, as far as I understand, the problem is just complex. Then, sadly, with equal power and overall characteristics. German diesel engines are still better due to the better technological base and design experience, but ours are "omnivorous", unpretentious in maintenance and more hardy in harsh climatic conditions (dust-sand, frost) and "oak" operation. request
    2. REZMovec
      REZMovec 2 November 2013 00: 28
      -3
      The B-92, the so-called X-shaped, is an attempt to assemble two B-84s on one crankshaft. They will not bring it to the mind in the Russian Federation, this is unambiguous. And he will not have a resource. The B-84 is already at the limit, but here two B-84s are at the limit and even a little higher - here you have no resource. Contact the Germans - they were able to combine four in-line engines on one crankshaft and got 1001 hp. for Bugatti Veyron. We have already reached 1200. The engine had to be rebuilt without taking anything as a basis. This is your problem. There were no motors in Russia, and there never will be. You have such an approach to business ...
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 2 November 2013 10: 47
        +4
        Quote: REZMovec
        The B-92, the so-called X-shaped, is an attempt to assemble two B-84s on one crankshaft. They will not bring it to the mind in the Russian Federation, this is unambiguous. And he will not have a resource. The B-84 is already at the limit, but here two B-84s are at the limit and even a little higher - here you have no resource. Contact the Germans - they were able to combine four in-line engines on one crankshaft and got 1001 hp. for Bugatti Veyron. We have already reached 1200. The engine had to be rebuilt without taking anything as a basis. This is your problem. There were no motors in Russia, and there never will be. You have such an approach to business ...

        You must have talent in order to collect so much nonsense in one post.
        1. REZMovec
          REZMovec 3 November 2013 00: 09
          0
          Quote: Bad_gr
          You must have talent in order to collect so much nonsense in one post.


          But where are we, the syri ...
      2. svp67
        svp67 2 November 2013 10: 53
        +1
        Quote: REZMovec
        The B-92, the so-called X-shaped, is an attempt to assemble two B-84s on one crankshaft. "

        In addition to emotions, it would not hurt you to have the knowledge of the issue under discussion, but they just don’t exist .. I haven’t heard more NONSENSE ...
      3. svp67
        svp67 2 November 2013 10: 55
        +2
        Quote: REZMovec
        There were no motors in Russia, and never will be.

        But in Ukraine they are - DO NOT MIX ...
        1. REZMovec
          REZMovec 3 November 2013 00: 18
          -1
          Quote: svp67
          Quote: REZMovec
          There were no motors in Russia, and never will be.

          But in Ukraine they are - DO NOT MIX ...


          And how is Ukraine different from Russia? We are all immigrants from the USSR, and there weren’t any of our motors there — everyone was picking up all over the world — aircraft engines from the French and Amers, automobile engines from the Amers, ship engines from the Germans ... All that is being produced in the Russian Federation is either licensed modern engines or modernization foreign engines of the 30-50s of the last century.
          And it's inappropriately to make an idiot out of me - take a look at the photo of B-92, everything is perfectly visible there.
          1. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr 3 November 2013 14: 30
            0
            Quote: REZMovec
            All that is now being produced in the Russian Federation is either licensed modern engines or the modernization of foreign engines of the 30-50s of the last century.

            ChTZ
            http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2011/10/5.html
            http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2011/10/6.html
            http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2011/10/7.html
            http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2011/10/8.html
            http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2011/10/9_28.html
            http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2011/10/blog-post_06.html

            Quote: REZMovec
            And it's inappropriately to make an idiot out of me - take a look at the photo of B-92, everything is perfectly visible there.

            It looks like you all engines on one face.
      4. svp67
        svp67 2 November 2013 10: 56
        +1
        Quote: REZMovec
        There were no motors in Russia, and never will be.

        This is what is not in Russia and what Ukraine puts on its KrAZ trucks - YaMZ engines


        1. REZMovec
          REZMovec 3 November 2013 00: 25
          0
          Quote: svp67
          Reply

          I can list these Yaroslavl motors for you, and what's next? YaMZ-236 and YaMZ-238 have been produced for more than forty years, with minimal changes in the form of a turbine. YaMZ-7511 - more than ten years, but the same YaMZ-238 is taken as a basis. The basis of these motors is an American of the 40s. Be smart further ... More modern motors of Yaroslavl - licensed in-line "RENO". So where are the Russian motors here?
      5. Vereshagin
        Vereshagin 2 November 2013 20: 24
        0
        As I see, you are a "great specialist" in other people's approaches. What education do you have? In which village did your "universities" take place? Would you mind listing the Ukrainian-made motors? I'd like to understand if you are in the subject?
        1. BlackCat
          BlackCat 2 November 2013 20: 48
          0
          Quote: Vereshagin
          As I see, you are a "great specialist" in other people's approaches. What education do you have? In which village did your "universities" take place? Would you mind listing the Ukrainian-made motors?
          :)))
          To an unfounded statement from
          Quote: REZMovec
          There were no motors in Russia, and never will be. You have such an approach to business ...
          given a very specific answer with photos. You can also add a plate on ChTZ with a list of their products
          It's from here http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2011/10/normal-0-false-false-false-ru-x-none-x.html
          And you yourself know what about Ukrainian engines?
          1. REZMovec
            REZMovec 3 November 2013 00: 33
            0
            Quote: BlackCat
            Quote: Vereshagin
            As I see, you are a "great specialist" in other people's approaches. What education do you have? In which village did your "universities" take place? Would you mind listing the Ukrainian-made motors?
            :)))
            To an unfounded statement from
            Quote: REZMovec
            There were no motors in Russia, and never will be. You have such an approach to business ...
            given a very specific answer with photos. You can also add a plate on ChTZ with a list of their products
            It's from here http: /gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2011/10/normal-0-false-false-false-ru-x-none-x.html
            And you yourself know what about Ukrainian engines?


            Laughter, and only - most of the above engines - the further development of the Kharkov B-2 of the late 30's.
            SO WHERE RUSSIAN MOTORS ???
            Hold on only to modernize the old and, for the most part, not Russky in origin.
            P.S. .................!
            1. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 3 November 2013 10: 03
              +3
              Quote: REZMovec
              Laughter, and only - most of the above engines - the further development of the Kharkov B-2 of the late 30's.

              laughing
              And the Boeing 747 is just a modernization of the Wright brothers' aircraft.
            2. svp67
              svp67 3 November 2013 13: 53
              0
              Quote: REZMovec
              Laughter, and only - most of the above engines - the further development of the Kharkov B-2 of the late 30's.
              SO WHERE RUSSIAN MOTORS ???


              KhPZ had a long tradition of diesel production, which began in the pre-revolutionary period. It produced ship and stationary "oil" for industry, engines for tractors and had its own diesel engine design department, then called "thermal".
              So that all KHARKIV motors are RUSSIAN, based on your logic ...
              And for that matter, "Chelyabinsk Design Bureau" put a lot of effort into BRINGING B2 to MIND and making it the B2 that EVERYONE can be proud of.
        2. samoletil18
          samoletil18 4 November 2013 22: 27
          0
          Quote: Vereshagin
          As I see, you are a "great specialist" in other people's approaches. What education do you have? In which village did your "universities" take place? Would you mind listing the Ukrainian-made motors? I'd like to understand if you are in the subject?

          MeMZ-965?
  • Alekseev
    Alekseev 1 November 2013 17: 41
    +4
    Quote: svp67
    And honestly, the photo does not allow you to fully see it, but it seems that the glasses are covered with "lithol" and paint is already on top of it, if this is so, then there is enough clean rags and a "thin, thin layer" of alcohol-water mixture for wiping ... just necessary work up your sleeves.

    This was done often enough! The instrument glass was covered with a thin layer of grease and painted. And if the author does not know this and presents it as a kind of marvel, he is minus. It looks like an attempt to file a fried fact.
    As for the low quality of the torsion bars, it could be a marriage, sir. Marriage has always been, but it was severely suppressed, as now - God knows. But how barbarously they change him, in some kind of pit ... In war, as in war! lol Are they doing everything right? Who is repairing? Perdukovsky suction or "miracle heroes"? smile
    As for the B92s, the engine is quite high-powered, it may not forgive what the B-84 forgave. The quality of the m16ihp-3 should be impeccable, and technical culture, too. But maybe a marriage. It is a pity that a well-known expert does not write, because of which, specifically, the motor breaks down, what breaks down in it?
    As for the sight and ergonomics, it may be very much. But I did not understand where the display (monitor) is, and there is no need to "bend your neck", you need to move the body to the left.
    The phrase about "sensors of each stage" of charging (probably means loading the gun) causes laughter. As well as the fact that the "tankmen" can't figure it out right away, they don't know what broke there in AZ? what
    Such mistakes, somewhat undermine the credibility of the article.
    But, the main idea is 100% true.
    The order in the tank units and at the enterprises of the military-industrial complex is not present "in full. No one is good for a marriage .... The equipment is not serviced by tankmen," tankmen ", who often attend. It's easy to fall apart ...
    Here it is necessary not only to engage in tank biathlon, but to work seriously and systematically, to restore order in the tank troops. And not only in them.
    1. svp67
      svp67 1 November 2013 18: 08
      +3
      Quote: Alekseev
      As for B92s, the engine is quite high-powered, it may not forgive what B-84 forgave. The quality of M16ihp-3 should be impeccable, and technical culture, too.

      soldier I know that the Indians use Mobil oil and not our m16ichp-3, that's why there are fewer problems with engines, that's just for our MO this oil is EXPENSIVE ... It's a shame.
      1. Alekseev
        Alekseev 2 November 2013 13: 43
        +3
        If m16ihp-3 meets the standard, then it is quite suitable.
        And, in general, examples about the sea oil.
        The mass failure of guitars when using MT-16p of a non-Yaroslavl factory is mentioned by the chief designer T-62.
        Kharkiv 5tdf quickly died when trying to operate them on the above MT-16p, and not on the M-16ihp3.
        A mass outage of 64-rock rollers failed at 27 TP (if memory serves), when the obsolete Zampotech allowed the support rollers to be extruded with a solidol instead of YaNZ-2, or at least Litola-24.
        However, it is necessary to follow the technique.
        Perhaps, "some civilians" represent a tank diesel engine as a kind of indestructible, "stout" mechanism. This is not true. Rather, it is a highly accelerated (and diesel, say, TD is superhigh) rally engine, which usually operates at full load. Push to the floor! The instructor always shouts to the cadet when moving through the mud of the tankodrome. Therefore, it has such a modest motor resource compared, say, with a conventional automobile diesel engine.
        An inexperienced soldier can overheat and screw it up for several km of the march in difficult conditions.
    2. tchoni
      tchoni 7 November 2013 15: 42
      0
      About britzel - it's far-fetched delirium. The point is that the sight can operate in two modes - "Visual" (daytime) as a conventional optical sight and "Thermal" (night). Because the picture of a night sight is displayed (there is a side plate), then using it at night as a sight is quite normal. At night, the "Visual" channel is useless (it is generally useless in this scope, since it is supplemented with a standard sight) in front of the standard sight, if it has, then it has insignificant advantages. So the algorithm of work is as follows - during the day you shoot at the standard sight - at night on the screen. And the TVP visual channel is a reserve, which is used in case of failure of the main one. That's all.

      And about the stained windows - really laughter. Even if they are really painted over (well, the soldier did not finish watching when preparing for the next parade (exhibition, arrival of the authorities)), then the question is solved simply: - 10 of the same soldiers in the technical park, armed with conventional blades from the "Neva" razor, put the platoon in order during the first two hours after lights out, and they still have a lot of time to sleep.
  • Lopatov
    Lopatov 1 November 2013 09: 34
    +7
    Cool. Gur Khan is kind of like a fan of the T-90, he doesn't need any "Armat" ... What, has your opinion changed again?
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 1 November 2013 09: 58
      +5
      Quote: Spade
      Gur Khan is kind of like a fan of the T-90, he doesn't need any "Armat" ... What, has your opinion changed again?

      maybe hurt for the living, the man he tact is not indifferent ...
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 1 November 2013 10: 04
        +5
        The stump is clear
    2. Avenger711
      Avenger711 1 November 2013 14: 04
      +5
      If the B-92 has a low resource, then why would the Armata have a high engine? And why would the idiocy of the modernization of the T-72 or the flaws in the T-90 not move to it? He wants one thing, to bring to mind what is already there, and then as much as you want you can cut fundamentally new. For some reason, the aviation industry does not expect the T-50, but is building the Su-30SM and Su-35 right now. Probably because there is a serious failure or fatigue of the structure on the Soviet scrap metal with new electronics will lead to the loss of the car, and the tank in tow can be in the box.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 1 November 2013 14: 08
        +3
        Why buy a T-90 and bring them to mind, if you can simply increase the combat capabilities of the T-72 with a normal upgrade?
        1. svp67
          svp67 1 November 2013 14: 43
          +3
          Quote: Spade
          Why buy a T-90 and bring them to mind, if you can simply increase the combat capabilities of the T-72 with a normal upgrade?

          Yes, simply because the T90 is BETTER in its capabilities ... and it can save more lives of our soldiers. That's just it ...
        2. Avenger711
          Avenger711 1 November 2013 16: 01
          0
          Because the price is almost the same, but in terms of quality there are doubts, which is also almost. On the contrary, it is noticeably worse. You definitely can’t alter the design of the armor.
        3. REZMovec
          REZMovec 2 November 2013 00: 34
          +1
          Why buy a T-90 and bring them to mind, if you can simply increase the combat capabilities of the T-72 with a normal upgrade?

          At the tank biathlon, three of the four tanks broke. But it was stated that these are new cars, only from the factory ...
  • Rus86
    Rus86 1 November 2013 09: 35
    +2
    how many have T13 and T92b72 put into the troops over 3 years? The questions are very interesting.
    1. Avenger711
      Avenger711 1 November 2013 14: 22
      +1
      Pieces 150 like.
  • Syrzhn
    Syrzhn 1 November 2013 09: 40
    +7
    But at the factory, a very good museum with portraits of Putin and EBN.
    1. svp67
      svp67 1 November 2013 09: 50
      +7
      Also made at the factory?
      1. Alex 241
        Alex 241 1 November 2013 09: 57
        +3
        Serezha, tell me as a tanker, a tank that was in operation, can have such new devices as just from the factory?
        1. svp67
          svp67 1 November 2013 10: 01
          +8
          Quote: Alex 241
          Serezha, tell me as a tanker, a tank that was in operation, can have such new devices as just from the factory?

          Of course not, but even if the tank is constantly in operation, then it undergoes several checks every year, something like a "technical inspection" and such a state of devices is not permissible, immediately "it is not successful ...". I say it again, there is now a need for crew work to bring the tank back to normal ...
        2. Syrzhn
          Syrzhn 1 November 2013 10: 10
          +4
          Was only on the 55s and 72s in the 80s of the last century and only as a passenger. All the tanks that I saw were also in poor condition, some instruments were either absent or broken, dirt on the ears. So, your truth, apparently.
      2. Syrzhn
        Syrzhn 1 November 2013 10: 04
        +2
        Portraits are not from the factory, and by the way, are funny. Not beautiful (like Repin), not terrible, not strange (like Dali), namely funny, like almost everything in modern art.
  • Samy
    Samy 1 November 2013 10: 02
    +3
    Yes-ah-ah ... just no words. Interestingly, should GDP itself make tank sights wipe?
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 1 November 2013 10: 07
      +9
      Yes. Who is he with us? Supreme Commander. So, it is responsible for the combat readiness of the troops subordinate to it. Including for shaded sights.
      1. svp67
        svp67 1 November 2013 10: 09
        +3
        Yes, of course it is GUILTY, but maybe you also need to ask from the one who specifically brought the military equipment to such a state and receives a salary for it ...
        1. Alex 241
          Alex 241 1 November 2013 10: 14
          +8
          It's a shame that the issue price is a roll of masking tape!
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 1 November 2013 10: 17
            10
            Solid oil and newspaper. You don’t even have to spend money.
          2. IRBIS
            IRBIS 1 November 2013 12: 17
            18
            Quote: Alex 241
            It's a shame that the issue price is a roll of masking tape!

            Well no! The price of the question is the stupid and not capable of anything commanders of these tanks and of these tank units in general, who do not service equipment and, I suspect, have no idea about this issue. At one time, we were removed from office and for less. Officers, their mother! Themselves - stupid ignoramuses and fighters can not teach. Salary, apartments ... For what, here for this?
            I'm not bragging, but my training group cars, on which the whole regiment "rode", looked better.
            Speaking of birds. The normal position of the gun barrel is forward. You need to be a nerd to move back with the barrel for a long time, making the already overloaded feed heavier. It’s not good to nod at the breeders, if the head itself does not cook even once. Warriors are bad ...
            1. svp67
              svp67 1 November 2013 12: 33
              +4
              Quote: IRBIS
              Officers, their mother!

              I won’t be surprised if ... SERGEANTS, their mother etih !!!
              1. IRBIS
                IRBIS 1 November 2013 13: 19
                +4
                Quote: svp67
                I won’t be surprised if ... SERGEANTS, their mother etih !!!

                But there are bosses over them!
                1. svp67
                  svp67 1 November 2013 15: 37
                  +1
                  Quote: IRBIS
                  But there are


                  Wallets their mother, pull ...
                  1. aksakal
                    aksakal 1 November 2013 16: 38
                    +2
                    Quote: svp67
                    Wallets their mother, pull ...

                    - no, everything is wrong guys! Mother them rewind rewind rewind! Like this! Learn, although I'm a devil non-Russian! laughing
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 1 November 2013 17: 42
                      +3
                      Quote: aksakal
                      Mother them

                      It can be seen that you are not from Belarus, there it would now sound to interrupt ... wink
            2. svp67
              svp67 1 November 2013 20: 09
              +1
              Quote: IRBIS
              You need to be a nerd to move back with the barrel for a long time, making the already overloaded feed heavier

              And then overloaded the feed? It seems that the whole new load went to the front rollers ...
              1. Kars
                Kars 1 November 2013 20: 13
                +2
                Quote: svp67
                And then overloaded the feed?

                Many Western tanks, as I understand it, had a gun’s barrel aft, which was full-time for marching and transportation.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 2 November 2013 10: 17
                  +1
                  Quote: Kars
                  Many Western tanks, as I understand it, had a gun’s barrel aft, which was full-time for marching and transportation.

                  Yes, in principle, and here, outside of a combat situation, it’s better to march with the cannon back, since it’s safer ...
              2. Alekseev
                Alekseev 2 November 2013 13: 28
                +3
                For a very long conversation with MBT, I personally have never, but in general, rarely had to change the suspension torsion bars.
                Despite the fact that they are designed for significant loads.Everyone has seen the "flights" of "flying" tanks, which can be performed not only by the T-80, but even such a heavy behemoth as the Merkava (even though it has springs, not torsion bars)
                The tower forward, backward is nonsense. Only marriage, or maybe they change without observing the prescribed twist angle. It is also impossible to hit the torsion shafts with "heavy" objects, micro-damage-stress concentrators may occur.
                In general, "skill, hardening, training is needed everywhere," an officer, a sergeant, a contract sergeant - a tankman, should be enthusiastic people who love their profession, and not losers from a civilian who have enlisted to work.
                As, however, in any serious matter.
        2. Bongo
          Bongo 1 November 2013 10: 15
          +5
          After the publication of these images, they will quickly find the extreme ones and in this part will bring order.
        3. Lopatov
          Lopatov 1 November 2013 10: 24
          +8
          So he should ask. Or make subordinates work. And then they rubbish like organizing tank biathlon and developing new bright stripes on the field form.

          Yesterday Mokrushin posted photos of a new field fireman and put a sting in there, believing that he had a lot of experience wearing such products. and therefore he has the necessary knowledge. As a result, the form has become dangerous.
      2. ksan
        ksan 1 November 2013 18: 30
        0
        Lopatov (1) RU Today, 10:07 ↑

        Yes. Who is he with us? Supreme Commander. So, it is responsible for the combat readiness of the troops subordinate to it. Including for shaded sights.
        Aha wink And also for the "cops" (whom the khachiks beat) in the market to intercede, "trucks" on the "tank biathlon" to repair and the fire on the submarine to extinguish. hi
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 1 November 2013 18: 35
          +1
          Quote: ksan
          Yeah And also for the "cops" (whom the khachiks beat) in the market to intercede, "trucks" on the "tank biathlon" to repair and the fire on the submarine to extinguish.

          Exactly. And if you do not pull, then it's time to retire.
  • ruslan207
    ruslan207 1 November 2013 10: 17
    +6
    At the tank biathlon, these tanks participated in the competition, something someone did not make a complaint, or maybe the author zhzhot?
    1. Bongo
      Bongo 1 November 2013 10: 21
      +9
      Are you sure exactly these tanks? Most likely, the instruments themselves and the sights are inoperative, so nobody cares that they are painted over. It is quite possible that these concrete tanks are used for the training and education of drivers.
      1. svp67
        svp67 1 November 2013 10: 37
        +4
        Quote: Bongo
        Likely

        ... these tanks were quickly, quickly transferred from one unit to another, and all this is the result of a "rush", when it was necessary to quickly bring the color of the tank to a normal state, and the process itself was not controlled by anyone, leaving everything at the mercy of the "pea jacket ..." . "
    2. svp67
      svp67 1 November 2013 10: 35
      +4
      Quote: ruslan207
      At the tank biathlon, these tanks participated in the competition, something someone did not make a complaint, or maybe the author zhzhot?

      T72B, still of Soviet manufacture, took part, and these machines are already RUSSIAN, and I repeat again, the crew just needs to work normally and put the tank in order, nothing bad happened, everything is fixable ...
    3. datur
      datur 1 November 2013 14: 08
      +2
      [quote = ruslan207] At the tank biathlon, these tanks participated in the competition, something someone didn’t make a complaint, maybe the author is hot? --- Yes, sometimes this happens with the gur khan !!! yes emotional comrade !!! wink This is especially evident when he butts with Ukrainians !!!! laughing
    4. The fat man
      The fat man 2 November 2013 00: 02
      +1
      or maybe they have a small intestine present UT Shoigu
      I admit I would not dare
  • ruslan207
    ruslan207 1 November 2013 10: 28
    +4
    New sights were also installed on Indian tanks, and they will not be silent
    1. Kars
      Kars 1 November 2013 12: 49
      +2
      When did the Pine begin on Indians?
      1. ruslan207
        ruslan207 1 November 2013 18: 22
        +1
        Kars-Yes, the rumor was the Indians are going to upgrade their T-72 were Belarusians
  • Yun Klob
    Yun Klob 1 November 2013 10: 32
    +4
    It is painted over - it will not rust.
    1. svp67
      svp67 1 November 2013 10: 41
      +4
      Quote: Yoon Clob
      It is painted over - it will not rust.
      and does not rot right away ...
  • Aydar
    Aydar 1 November 2013 11: 21
    +5
    the tank itself may not be bad, the weak point is the torsion bars, the engine is moody, but it is most likely that the operation does not go into any gates, and the quality of spare parts is low, and what do you want from conscripts? here is the omission of the commanders. such a commander would be put to the wall.
    1. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 1 November 2013 11: 55
      +1
      In educational companies, apparently, they are also not being taught that. And if so, then it’s not so.
  • Aydar
    Aydar 1 November 2013 11: 24
    +4
    T-72B3 tank, what is it modern? repaired and with that kind of money what do you want? the generals don’t drive tanks, and they don’t feel sorry for the soldiers.?
  • erofich
    erofich 1 November 2013 11: 24
    +4
    There is simply no person who is rooting for his job.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Boris55
    Boris55 1 November 2013 11: 50
    +1
    In my garbage, some kind of foreign (the pictures are not all Russian in the landfill plastered).
    Triplexes back in the Second World War (T-34, etc.) changed when they were dirty or damaged without leaving the tank. An article from a series about a "terminator" type machine is helluva lot heavy and more than one aircraft will not be able to deliver it to the places of tank battles. Therefore, they say it is bad and unnecessary ... But why should the tank support vehicle be kept separate from the tanks on the other side of the country?
    According to the author, there is enough sniper to blind the tank - nonsense.
    1. Avenger711
      Avenger711 1 November 2013 14: 26
      +1
      In short time is enough, only you still get.
  • Prapor-527
    Prapor-527 1 November 2013 12: 10
    0
    Quote: roma2
    Put Russia on its knees.
    You cannot kneel the one who is sucking at this time ...
  • 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 1 November 2013 12: 14
    +7
    He served at one time in a tank regiment, in the 80s. The regiment was deployed, staffing more than 1000 people, the exercises of tank battalions went on constantly, once a year went to Prudby in full force. And still, part of the equipment hung on the blocks. For example, I like 6 urals of ammunition delivery were hanging from the driver. And I had to service them. When I received half was understaffed, I had to turn around. Next to it was a neighboring castrated regiment, so there were 30 tanks, BMP, etc. on 300 soldiers, and every year, atoms and more often they painted. What do you think soldiers the conscript wanted to bother with gluing the sights of headlights and so on, since no one had any business with the storage equipment. But we had it because the machines were used intensively and the crew was engaged in this. By the way, there was no painting tape then. And all the jambs were washed themselves.
    1. IRBIS
      IRBIS 1 November 2013 12: 23
      +1
      Quote: 1c-inform-city
      there on 30 soldiers hung on the pads of 300 tanks,

      What are the tanks hung on, sorry? This is something new in the field of storage of armored vehicles - tanks hanging on blocks. Did you see it yourself or did someone tell you this nonsense?
      1. 1c-inform-city
        1c-inform-city 1 November 2013 13: 03
        +3
        This is just a figurative expression for the equipment in storage.
        P.S.Wheel technology really hung on wooden blocks.
        1. IRBIS
          IRBIS 1 November 2013 13: 21
          +1
          Quote: 1c-inform-city
          This is just a figurative expression for the equipment in storage.
          P.S.Wheel technology really hung on wooden blocks.

          I’m not about to hurt or prick. Cars - of course, the battalion itself was "hanging", but the tanks ... Therefore, I asked again, do not be offended!
          1. 1c-inform-city
            1c-inform-city 1 November 2013 14: 22
            0
            No problems.
        2. Aleks tv
          Aleks tv 1 November 2013 13: 23
          +4
          Quote: 1c-inform-city
          Wheel machinery really hung on wooden blocks.

          Yes. And the wheels are densely painted with silver.

          Slightly put it about tanks, Sergey ...
          When stored in an open area, goose must NOT touch the ground. More often than not, she stood on the sleepers whistled somewhere.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 1 November 2013 13: 27
            0
            Quote: Aleks tv
            More often than not, she stood on the sleepers whistled somewhere.

            This is if there is no concrete.
      2. Lopatov
        Lopatov 1 November 2013 13: 25
        +8
        He probably meant lying.
        I remember I was still a schoolboy, we have a motorized rifle cropped division transferred to the category of BHVT. At first, people were taken away, then they ordered tanks and infantry fighting vehicles to be preserved in a cocoon. That show was still. Caught up with partisans, some other obscure personalities ... The cost of spare parts for automobiles at times in the area fell. Group KamAZ spare parts were sold for two liters of vodka. When the show with the production was finished, the base was reduced, the equipment was dragged.

        The Soviet army was killed qualitatively.
  • makarov
    makarov 1 November 2013 12: 48
    +3
    Author- CHIEF for Power. Honor and praise for his position, courage and courage.
    I would like to hope for the reputation of the editorial staff in covering the problem in the printed version, so that the PERSONs of those responsible will get to the brain.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • mixxlll
    mixxlll 1 November 2013 14: 07
    0
    Training is training.
  • mixxlll
    mixxlll 1 November 2013 14: 08
    0
    Tell me in grace where and when everything was fine in the study. She is a study in Africa, too.
  • Sam-07
    Sam-07 1 November 2013 14: 11
    +5
    pictured are tanks after painting, observation devices are smeared with solid oil and splattered with paint. cleaning work for 10 minutes. article about everything is gone ...
    1. Algor73
      Algor73 1 November 2013 19: 45
      0
      Something is not visible solidol. And today's army is not the same in which we served. I fully believe that the sights are painted over, but the soldier did not paint with a brush. The main thing is that it would be monotonous ... As in the army, everything shone and shone
  • gameover65
    gameover65 1 November 2013 14: 13
    0
    Received from a friend the other day who visited one of the training units, photo T-90 arr. 1992. and the recently arrived early T-90A (2004-2005 release).


    here is the answer of the shaded observation devices. these tanks recently arrived at the training unit, the one who sent, he painted. and here I do not understand the combat readiness.
    although it would be worthwhile to figure out who painted so!
  • e3tozy
    e3tozy 1 November 2013 14: 29
    +2
    Question to specialists. Which Indian T-90 engine? What torsion bars? After all, if I am not mistaken, there they proved themselves very well. Latin America is not bad either. Or is it just such a different configuration? Please clarify.
  • gallville
    gallville 1 November 2013 15: 36
    +7
    Such articles are just swallows =))
    Complete decommissioning of the T-80 by 2015, and replacing it with a T-72B with modernization to B3 level at a rate of 100-200 units.

    In stock:
    T-90A - 400 pcs.
    T-80 - 4000 pcs.
    T-72 - 9000 thousand units.

    Estimated presence in the troops in 2013:
    T-90 - 400 pcs.
    T-72B, B3 - 600 pcs.
    T - 80 - 1000 pcs. At the time of 2013


    By 2015, the T-80 is withdrawn from service. Replacement T-72.
    150 T-72B3 arrive annually .. At the time of 2013, about 300 units were already delivered. So by 2015 .... 150 units * 2 years another 300. Total 300 + 300 = 600 units. B3
    What is the result:
    2015 year
    T-90A - 400 units.
    T-72B3 - 600 units
    T-72B - 1000 !!!!!!
    Those. We are changing 1000 T-80 tanks in the troops to a mass mobilization tank T-72B.
    At the same time, T-80 tanks are located in the north and the Far East where the GTD is relevant !!!
    Comparing the T-80U and T-72B (namely B) - according to the performance characteristics it is somehow not ethical - different classes of machines.
    As for Armata, so at best she’s only starting to join the troops in trial parties.
    1. Yemelya
      Yemelya 1 November 2013 20: 08
      0
      Quote: gallville
      In stock:
      T-90A - 400 pcs.
      T-80 - 4000 pcs.
      T-72 - 9000 thousand units.

      Estimated presence in the troops in 2013:
      T-90 - 400 pcs.
      T-72B, B3 - 600 pcs.
      T - 80 - 1000 pcs. At the time of 2013


      T-90A, it seems, is only 180 pcs., And they are in the troops.
      1. gallville
        gallville 1 November 2013 20: 23
        0
        A bit wrong = (
        more than 500 T-90 of all modifications (of which about 200 units are in storage), as of 2012.
        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2-90
        Although it is strange that I displayed these numbers on a different form from a month ago, and then it was, exactly 400 pieces.
  • tank64rus
    tank64rus 1 November 2013 16: 28
    +3
    As for painting inspection instruments with paint, this was all before. Pravdv, in SA for this it was possible to get slap in the face. Although judging by the fact that the paint layer is visible on the solid, it is quickly eliminated. And those comments on the engine and chassis should be taken into account by the manufacturer and eliminated, as was the case in Soviet times. In general, the slogan of studying military affairs is currently relevant at all times.
  • tank64rus
    tank64rus 1 November 2013 16: 28
    +3
    As for painting inspection instruments with paint, this was all before. Pravdv, in SA for this it was possible to get slap in the face. Although judging by the fact that the paint layer is visible on the solid, it is quickly eliminated. And those comments on the engine and chassis should be taken into account by the manufacturer and eliminated, as was the case in Soviet times. In general, the slogan of studying military affairs is currently relevant at all times.
    1. roial
      1 November 2013 18: 08
      +1
      Judging by the fact that in some places the paint has already peeled off and rust is visible, these tanks stood idle for at least half a year.
  • ka5280
    ka5280 1 November 2013 16: 40
    +2
    My question is about the engine - 350 hours to the capital, do the clay engines do?
  • pinachet
    pinachet 1 November 2013 16: 54
    0
    about painting ..
    washing kshm (bm 145 gull) after painting (redecorating in part), I wiped all observation devices with kerosene, etc.
    since it was painted simply from a pulvilizer.
  • Foreman
    Foreman 1 November 2013 17: 15
    +4
    I will say this. There is no kind of troops in Russia that would not suffer from this PAINT! Paint in RUSSIA is evil and undermining the combat readiness of units and subunits. And ALL! Caught in the hands of a brush or airbrush there is no difference - ordered to paint and URAAA! Responsible in parts must be painted in poisonous green! And that would have shone at night for a month!
  • Powder donut
    Powder donut 1 November 2013 17: 30
    +4
    Golden words were once uttered by the People’s Commissar of Railways Lazar Moiseevich Kaganovich: “Every accident has a name, surname and position” ...

    Really great words, I really like it. Apparently the Stalin administration could teach a lot of current managers.
  • Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 1 November 2013 17: 47
    +1
    As far as can be judged from the information provided by the author, the indicated armored vehicles are not new, but have already been in operation for several years. Judging by the photographs, which show the remains of the old factory paint, these tanks were "ushatan" for a long time and were stored in an inappropriate way somewhere in the open air. Then, they were hastily painted by some "Tajiks" or demobilized conscripts (who all do not care) with the help of a spray gun (and greatly saving on paint). At the expense of the allegedly "often breaking" torsion bars and the engine, foolishly and ... you can break it. A tank, like any complex equipment, requires competent operation and correct and timely maintenance, and this service in form and content is very different from the maintenance of a passenger car. Unfortunately, according to my information, the personnel operating today armored vehicles (and indeed any equipment in the army) does not differ in special technical (and often ordinary) literacy. And to them, as they themselves say: on all "shit ..." and "do not give a damn", and also to them, all "fuck ... yu" That's the result.
  • mole
    mole 1 November 2013 17: 55
    0
    Quote: Monster_Fat
    As far as can be judged from the information provided by the author, the indicated armored vehicles are not new, but have already been in operation for several years. Judging by the photographs, which show the remains of the old factory paint, these tanks were "ushatan" for a long time and were stored in an inappropriate way somewhere in the open air. Then, they were hastily painted by some "Tajiks" or demobilized conscripts (who all do not care) with the help of a spray gun (and greatly saving on paint). At the expense of the allegedly "often breaking" torsion bars and the engine, foolishly and ... you can break it. A tank, like any complex equipment, requires competent operation and correct and timely maintenance, and this service in form and content is very different from the maintenance of a passenger car. Unfortunately, according to my information, the personnel operating today armored vehicles (and indeed any equipment in the army) does not differ in special technical (and often ordinary) literacy. And to them, as they themselves say: on all "shit ..." and "do not give a damn", and also to them, all "fuck ... yu" That's the result.

    Well, someone is responsible for these cars !? Here nah .. and drive, tk. "him" - FSUs ...
    And the fact that new is not new, for many years, then look at your car and reconsider "your zealous attitude." If the bumper is hit, you don't throw the car away, do you?
  • Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 1 November 2013 18: 06
    0
    So, also my car. And even then, look at how many cars killed dead to death drive on roads and are sold at flea markets ....
    Oh, come on, whoever needs something now, besides his own w ... s and wallet.
  • de bouillon
    de bouillon 1 November 2013 18: 18
    +1
    Shoigu did not casually raise the topic of ostentatious teachings. wink


    at one of the parades in the late 30s, Marshal Budenov, looking at the passing armada of tanks of the Red Army, concluded that something like: it’ll burn to hell ..

    in the 41st it happened. In the archives of MK and TK, a lot of documents have been preserved here about the same content as in the article itself.

    Surprisingly, one of the troubles of the Russian army for all ages is irresponsibility, slackness, fraud, indifference, debelism at all levels, the disregard of the higher command, which is transmitted by inertia to the very bottom, it will carry it over, and so it will go away, well, it’s awful. .. and most importantly, the Russian army is successfully drinking through the experience of past wars and conflicts. There are no experts and institutions that could really assess the current state of wars and develop new standards for military training.

    for example, after Chechnya: an eloquent example is given by the President of the College of Military Experts of the Russian Federation, Major General Alexander Vladimirov:

    - Now there was a joke in general, when the American captain who arrived for an exchange turned out to be the only person who correctly knew how to shoot from the hatch, from the basement, into the room during the exercises, when practicing the battle in the city, at the show. All the rest simply do not know what to do with it.
    1. REZMovec
      REZMovec 2 November 2013 01: 01
      0
      at one of the parades in the late 30s, Marshal Budenov, looking at the passing armada of tanks of the Red Army, concluded that something like: it’ll burn to hell ..

      in the 41st it happened. In the archives of MK and TK, a lot of documents have been preserved here about the same content as in the article itself.

      Surprisingly, one of the troubles of the Russian army for all ages is irresponsibility, slackness, fraud, indifference, debelism at all levels, the disregard of the higher command, which is transmitted by inertia to the very bottom, it will carry it over, and so it will go away, well, it’s awful. ..


      That's right - in the border districts, the planes stood at the airfields in a row, without disguise, SB-2 generally shone with a bare duralumin in the sun. On so many tanks, the engines were removed and sent to repair plants. T-34 and KV came with one ammunition and one refueling ... You read this and understand how many German spies served in the Red Army, and at key posts ...
      1. Powder donut
        Powder donut 2 November 2013 15: 52
        0
        Well, of course, then German spies and probably Jews were to blame, and now lumps and America. Everything is as usual, but maybe you should look for reasons in yourself
  • de bouillon
    de bouillon 1 November 2013 18: 23
    +5
    Quote: Monster_Fat
    As far as can be judged from the information provided by the author, the indicated armored vehicles are not new, but have already been in operation for several years. Judging by the photographs, which show the remains of the old factory paint, these tanks were "ushatan" for a long time and were stored in an inappropriate way somewhere in the open air. Then, they were hastily painted by some "Tajiks" or demobilized conscripts (who all do not care) with the help of a spray gun (and greatly saving on paint). At the expense of the allegedly "often breaking" torsion bars and the engine, foolishly and ... you can break it. A tank, like any complex equipment, requires competent operation and correct and timely maintenance, and this service in form and content is very different from the maintenance of a passenger car. Unfortunately, according to my information, the personnel operating today armored vehicles (and indeed any equipment in the army) does not differ in special technical (and often ordinary) literacy. And to them, as they themselves say: on all "shit ..." and "do not give a damn", and also to them, all "fuck ... yu" That's the result.


    do you think the tanks are old ?? they are only 8 years old. garbage for the tank, but I saw the color and rough metal processing of the new BMP-3 and BMD-4, the same garbage. It’s as if they are doing blind feet, so I fully understand our generals who constantly complain about the quality of military equipment. In my opinion, compared to Soviet times, they began to do worse, much worse.
    1. lucidlook
      lucidlook 1 November 2013 18: 48
      +1
      Quote: de Bouillon
      I understand our generals who are constantly dissatisfied with the quality of military equipment

      Because they steal from top to bottom! Moreover, both in civilian life and in the army. When the generals themselves stop stealing and condoning theft, when they show by their own example how to honestly serve the fatherland, then their discontent will sound a little better than an empty chatter.
    2. e3tozy
      e3tozy 1 November 2013 20: 29
      0
      But for export, they don’t lick it.
  • Foreman
    Foreman 1 November 2013 18: 32
    +4
    All this is called a short and capacious word - "SABOTAGE" and you ?! () ...
    1. The fat man
      The fat man 1 November 2013 23: 33
      0
      I completely agree with you. only now I'm interested in the position of those who inspect the military unit
  • lucidlook
    lucidlook 1 November 2013 18: 44
    0
    The main sight of the T-72B3 "Sosna-U"

    And on the remote control still flaunts the modest label of the manufacturer of the main component - "THALES". It seems like they wanted to cover it up. Not allowed?
  • Bogranz
    Bogranz 1 November 2013 19: 28
    +2
    I'm not a tanker ... I confess right away and honestly. Therefore, I will refrain from giving assessments ... In the early 90s, our drivers of the APC jokingly called m.v. BMP-2 "tractor drivers", those in response to the drivers of armored personnel carriers - "cyclists." What is it?)))) Regarding the pictures of the article: a) to draw conclusions from the pictures of the tower of one tank about the state of all troops ???? Hmm .. famously !!! b)not "residential" any kind on the pictures. There are no traces of the crew ... The pictures were taken at the storage base ??? (second photo from above - there is oiled rags on the spring: will it be on the used equipment ?, traces of rust ...at)why there is no larger image? Did the author do this intentionally or in order to show a specific place on the tower? d)is it possible to understand what TANK is in the picture ??? (tell me, tankers?)d)the author wants to place 2 sights, but ...in one, convenient location. The desire is understandable, but not feasible: the tank is not space and the place in it is limited (interesting, but the author has information "how many people broke their necks" trying to reach the second sight?)f)picture "The actual broken torsion bar". Well ... I had to see a torsion bar, but in the picture I actually see just a crowbar for ease of use wrapped in blue electrical tape.
    The article is very similar to an ordinary (excuse me) vyser with a claim to objective analysis.
    1. The fat man
      The fat man 1 November 2013 23: 42
      0
      please tell me i did not quite understand you
      I'm at the expense of * storage base "maybe as I understand you meant" are in conservation ", but how long should the t-90 be in conservation not the T-62 and not the T-72 of earlier modifications
      1. Bogranz
        Bogranz 2 November 2013 14: 47
        0
        Are you sure that in the pictures the top of the gable is exactly the T-90?
  • 31231
    31231 1 November 2013 19: 46
    0
    Quote: Spade
    Quote: ksan
    Yeah And also for the "cops" (whom the khachiks beat) in the market to intercede, "trucks" on the "tank biathlon" to repair and the fire on the submarine to extinguish.

    Exactly. And if you do not pull, then it's time to retire.


    So you can agree that the Lord God will become guilty of everything.
  • b-130
    b-130 1 November 2013 20: 03
    0
    I read smart people in the comments and recall the article by Wasserman about the reasons for the initial defeats in the Second World War. Can we lure again?
  • kind
    kind 1 November 2013 20: 27
    +1
    It was striking that the windows of the sights (in particular the commander's “Agatha”) and observation devices were flooded. How these tanks were operated is completely incomprehensible!

    I ask the author of the article: Have you served in the army? The dirt on the appliances you mistook for paint. Incidentally, the brown rim at the edges of the optics is a sealant. Your friend (as I understood the conscript) as you are ignoramuses in military equipment, do not criticize what you have no idea. Article bold minus
  • iConst
    iConst 1 November 2013 20: 51
    +2
    Stop yelling that "our people are invincible" ... It was a long time ago. Now the Russian people are egoistic and indifferent to the highest degree. That says it all. Say thanks to the "democratically elected" parliament, the president, the media and "our partners".

    In short, Dulles’s plan (whether it was, wasn’t) implemented about 60-70 percent that way:

    "... Sowing chaos in Russia - we will quietly replace their values ​​with false ones and make them believe in these false values. How? We will find our like-minded people, our assistants and allies in Russia itself. Episode by episode will be played out with a grandiose scale tragedy of the death of the most rebellious people on earth, the final, irreversible fading of their self-consciousness ..."

    read more: _http: //vk.com/topic-597478_22476984
    1. Abracadabra
      Abracadabra 2 November 2013 00: 09
      -3
      The Dulles Plan, nothing more than the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, is idiotic nonsense. It's like hysteria and endless, meaningless discussions of the idiotic "anti-law", just to divert attention from real problems and those responsible for them! Is it the Americans who prevent Putin from planting thieves for irresponsibility and negligence? Or maybe they control the corrupt prosecutor's office? And they also created 30 summer garbage, which drunkenly tells how to make money and have 3 apartments for 500 thousand € on the Spanish coast, according to Dulles's plan? One of two things, or you are fine with everything and whine, poin foreva! Or it's time to face the truth and remember about the feeling of one's own dignity, it is incompatible with fur stores and other attributes of the Russian government.
      1. aksakal
        aksakal 2 November 2013 00: 55
        +2
        Quote: Abra Kadabra
        The Dulles Plan, nothing more than the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, is idiotic nonsense. It's like hysteria and endless, meaningless discussions of the idiotic "anti-law", just to divert attention from real problems and those responsible for them! Is it the Americans who prevent Putin from planting thieves for irresponsibility and negligence? Or maybe they control the corrupt prosecutor's office? And they also created 30 summer garbage, which drunkenly tells how to make money and have 3 apartments for 500 thousand € on the Spanish coast, according to Dulles's plan? One of two things, or you are fine with everything and whine, poin foreva! Or it's time to face the truth and remember about the feeling of one's own dignity, it is incompatible with fur stores and other attributes of the Russian government.

        - oh well, you heard, stop humming the same song here. No offense, the professor has a better theme "a la look for those who are guilty in yourself!" turned out. Go at least learn from the professor, or something ... And how depressing Israel is, the quality is getting worse and worse. Better tell me, when will your fellow tribesmen return the wealth to the Russian people? And then in the 90s, slyly and wisely with the help of Chubais, they grabbed it, now they walk through the deserts in white on foot, and with your help we have fairy tales about "do you live badly? It's your own fault!" tell. And return? Used and woke up. Tell the owners - people are waiting. And we have already discussed the Americans' fault or not. The very ideology of the supremacy of material well-being, implanted by American-backed liberalism, IS DAMAGED - hence all the troubles. People here are much smarter than you think they are sitting.
        And most importantly - put Foreva? Why do the Russians not allow themselves to type, for example, "Netanyahuy back !? Draw conclusions and I’m still with you softly. I can and hard — but ask the Professor or even Atalef. And I do not advise you to run into it."
        1. Abracadabra
          Abracadabra 3 November 2013 01: 22
          0
          What kind of tribesmen? Do you think Russians are all zombie? He wrote all sorts of meaningless nonsense, Netanyahu, sailed desert ... Specifically, answer, what am I wrong about? The thieves and goofs in governing a country like you, every idiotic lying diarrhea of ​​propaganda is poured on your head, and in the decaying west you yourself are satisfied with your life! This is a fact! Damage is such a verbiage as yours, this is especially evident in the standard of living in the West.
          1. aksakal
            aksakal 3 November 2013 22: 44
            -1
            Quote: Abra Kadabra
            Specifically answer, what am I wrong in? The thieves and goofs in governing a country like you, every idiotic lying diarrhea of ​​propaganda is poured on their heads,

            - Once again, I briefly inform you - do not take out the assessments of the Russian leaders and political elite, let them speak out, it is their elite, and they will decide what to do with their elite. If you want to negatively evaluate someone, evaluate your Netanyahu with his bed on the plane and with his manic desire to bomb someone thread in the district. I have likewise already evaluated my President for his brother-in-law and for his daughters. But I try not to evaluate Putin and I write everything
            yes - "Putin", not "put Foreva". Is it reaching you? Even Medvedev I try not to evaluate, although to be honest I don’t like this prime minister. I advise you to do the same, you simply do not have the right to evaluate, and if you do this, a citizen of a state that is a geopolitical enemy of Russia in the Middle East, then you can rightly be suspected of pursuing Israel's interests to the detriment of Russia, and therefore even if you do it many times right, you will not expect any trust in your posts, or even any positive attitude towards them. And if you really want good for the Russians, persuade your fellow tribesmen to give the Russian people what they stole, this one step will raise your rating to unprecedented heights. And the way your fellow tribesmen act in your face now, robbed and now exhort "We did not steal anything, we honestly earned it, but the fact that you are now experiencing difficulties - so it is in yourself!" - I still wonder why Jewish pogroms have not yet begun in Russia.
            Do you understand the message of your post? You will NOT DISCUSS Putin with you, all the more so in a negative way, nor the flaws of the Russian mentality WILL BE - just the nose of the thieves is not mature enough to discuss this with anyone at all. CLEAR?
            1. Abracadabra
              Abracadabra 7 November 2013 06: 39
              0
              Unlike you, I’m Russian, but you hell knows who, moreover, you are slowing down .. Israel, Natanyahu ..., .., what do I have to do with this? And you are the last one whom I will ask permission to ask whom I discuss and who not. And if I consider it right to call thieves and irresponsible idiots the way they deserve it, I will do it. CLEAR?!
      2. iConst
        iConst 2 November 2013 02: 49
        +2
        So, dear, you describe the result of the action of this plan. Exactly what was required.

        Look around! Or are we from over the hill? But you are right about one thing - we, "Russians", are also to blame for sitting in burrows ...

        I look closely: the people are embittered and all thoughts are not good for themselves, but bad for the other: not to assert their rights by consolidating, but the other to the count!

        Why don't schools teach the "correct" algorithm for working with government institutions? where and how to apply and control the situation?

        The answer is simple - the "state" (officials) does not need this! After all, you will have to fulfill your duties (at least somehow)!

        That rubs the topic people in chat rooms, on benches and spills anger at each other.
        1. Abracadabra
          Abracadabra 3 November 2013 01: 26
          -1
          That's what I’m talking about! Control over bureaucrats, who no one can call them in any way, who always behave so brazenly as much as society allows them, this is - democracy. This is the basis for well-being in Western countries. And you look at the comment of the aksakal, it’s a shame to read something like that, you understand that the government’s gebnya is in vain for the people’s brains.
    2. REZMovec
      REZMovec 2 November 2013 01: 23
      +1
      I would like to add for the brothers-Russians and the statement of Bismarck:
      "The power of Russia can only be undermined by the separation of Ukraine from it ... it is necessary not only to tear away, but also to oppose Ukraine to Russia. To do this, you only need to find and nurture traitors among the elite and, with their help, change the self-consciousness of one part of the great people to such an extent that it will to hate everything Russian, to hate your kind, without realizing it. Everything else is a matter of time. Otto Von Bismarck

      And you here speak about "s" ...
      1. Vereshagin
        Vereshagin 2 November 2013 20: 35
        +3
        Judging by your statements, something our enemies managed ...
  • bublic82009
    bublic82009 1 November 2013 22: 31
    0
    But are they working tanks? it feels like they were abandoned a year ago
  • GEO
    GEO 1 November 2013 22: 43
    +1
    Quote: vjhbc
    that’s why you don’t always take the right criticism and then you are outraged that they will send soldiers to slaughter to fill up with corpses and fill them with blood, isn’t it better to do everything well before the war or you don’t feel sorry for yourself because the trend is 1 war NN Golovin’s calculations, 1939 1 300 war from about 000 to 2, that is, an increase of 12-000 and you are ready to lose from 000 just because you have a capricious mood and two wars in this vein haven’t taught you how much then there will be Russians from 20 to 000 you yourself e regret that even the allies would think you did with such a policy inevitably leads us to the Belarusians to the complete destruction of genocide
    Quote: ka5280
    And about kneeling, you ask Adolf Fashistovich. He already reached Moscow and burnt in the end. So breathe evenly Roma.

    Hey ally, did you help us a lot in 888? Just glad to eat everything on both cheeks for free ...
  • Vlad_Mir
    Vlad_Mir 1 November 2013 23: 20
    0
    Generally somehow strange. The tank sells well and the same Indians praise it. Maybe tanks for India and tanks for Russia are different tanks?
    1. uwzek
      uwzek 1 November 2013 23: 50
      +1
      A little different. According to their characteristics, export T-90s are weaker than those supplied to our army, and significantly (with the exception of communications, the Russian radios are worse and more). It’s just that our tanks operate more culturally abroad, they put oil in the tank, the crews are better trained ,,,
  • Stinger
    Stinger 2 November 2013 00: 00
    +1
    Compare the technology of 1992 and 2004-2005. not allowed. The USSR collapsed in December 1991, so that the technology released in 92g. was done at a normal plant with normal personnel, and since 93 the state order at Uralvagonzavod fell more than 100 times. In subsequent years, they released 10 each, did not pay wages, and all skilled workers fled. Moreover, the military reception was actually destroyed. Therefore, you can ulcerate as much as you like. The miracle is that the plant generally retained the production of tanks. Hi chubyatsam!
  • Garrym
    Garrym 2 November 2013 00: 36
    0
    I do not know why you are surprised? As the naval wisdom says: "Wherever you kiss a sailor, he has an ass everywhere" (the land version about a soldier) ... He was told to paint, so he painted it ... And the fact that an officer or a midshipman to check was not so for you and it is said "training unit", there are no honors from BP and PP, they should be kept in combat units.
  • Valentinv
    Valentinv 2 November 2013 00: 42
    0
    The penultimate photo shows THALES?
  • Basileus
    Basileus 2 November 2013 00: 42
    0
    Someone offended Gurkhan at UVZ — Gurkhan takes revenge. Fun.
  • old rocket man
    old rocket man 2 November 2013 01: 01
    +1
    I have a question for the tank crew,
    350 hours of motor life is it a lot or a little?
    At a speed of 20-30 km / h, this is 7-10 thousand km of run, to Berlin from Moscow (I don't remember exactly) but less than 3 thousand km, during the Second World War the tank did not "reel" even 500 km before death.
    Are we going to drive them from Smolensk to Khabarovsk on our own? Or are we very rich?
    They (our tanks) are therefore much cheaper than the Abrams, because they are, but there are many of them (oooh) recourse
    Correct, if not right, I will be grateful hi