Military Review

Tank T-64BM "Bulat". Account losses open

45
According to Ukrainian and Russian media reports, on the evening of July 13, the Ukrainian armed forces attempted to bypass Lugansk and break through to the troops surrounded at the Lugansk airport. The first separate was thrown into battle tank brigade in service with which there are several types of armored vehicles. Among other vehicles, this connection operates the main tanks T-64BM "Bulat", which is the latest modification of the family. The July 13 fight was not only one of the first cases of combat use of the Bulat, but also opened the account for their losses. According to some reports, three Ukrainian tanks were destroyed that day, one of which was the T-64BM. In addition, Ukrainian troops lost several armored personnel carriers and vehicles.


Shortly after the 13 fights of July, the first photos of their results were published. On one of them, a burnt tank was captured with a number of characteristic signs, which allowed to define it as Bulat T-64BM. This car had not only to take part in hostilities, but also to become the first destroyed tank of its model. The Ukrainian tank was shot down and burned down near the town of Lutugino in the territory of the unrecognized Luhansk People's Republic.



photo http://andrei-bt.livejournal.com


Interesting is the reaction of some media to the destruction of the Ukrainian tank. So, already on July 14, the image of the burned-out car appeared in the photo selection of the Segodnya.UA online edition. During the preparation of this material, the Ukrainian tank “turned” into a fighting vehicle of Lugansk militias, destroyed by the Ukrainian Air Force.

There are at least two photographs of the first Bulat tank destroyed. They are clearly visible damage to the external elements of the combat vehicle, which allow you to build their assumptions. At the same time, it is impossible to talk about anything with certainty, since accurate and confirmed data on the course of the battle and the method of destruction of the vehicle are still lacking.

When examining the existing photographs of a burnt T-64BM, numerous damage to the external aggregates of the tank, as well as numerous traces of burning, are the first to be noticed. On-board screens, additional turret protection and other elements of the machine are noticeably deformed, smoke grenade launchers are dented or torn from their seats. In addition, the body is covered with soot. Best of all traces of burning are visible on the log, fixed on the stern of the machine. Probably, during the battle the car lost its course, after which it was shot by the enemy. In favor of this version speaks torn left caterpillar.

Internal damage to the tank is unknown, but some things may indicate serious damage to some units. The photo shows that the tank almost fell on the bottom of the bottom, so torsion suspension slipped. Despite all the damage to the tank, his crew could have survived or at least left the wrecked car. The hatches of the crew were open and, apparently, already after that they were covered with soot.

The method of destruction of the tank remained unknown. Probably, the projectile or rocket hit the port side and therefore there is no hole in the published photos. The fire could have followed the hit, as a result of which the external surface of the car received characteristic damage, and the torsion bars did not cope with the thermal loads and “sat down”. However, the fire did not lead to the detonation of the ammunition, and this fact may disprove the version about the penetration of the left side of the fighting compartment.

As an alternative version, taking into account the strong burning and other damage to the destroyed tank, you can consider the use of reactive artillery. Finally, the Ukrainian media could not be mistaken, and the tank was indeed destroyed by a rocket-bomb attack from the air. However, in this case, there are corresponding not entirely pleasant questions to the pilots of the Ukrainian Air Force.

Some issues may be caused by a tow rope attached to one of the stern hooks of a burnt car. This nuance can serve as the basis for another version: the tank was hit and lost the ability to continue the battle. After that, they tried to evacuate him, but for some reason they abandoned him. Perhaps the reason for this was the beginning of the shelling that destroyed the tank.

Anyway, the incident with the T-64BM “Bulat” tank near Lugansk confirms the obvious fact: any armored vehicle can be damaged or destroyed. However, some of the features of the T-64BM project, as well as the “PR campaign,” which once developed around it, gives the situation an ambiguous look. The “Bulat” project was created with the aim of bringing the characteristics of the production tanks of the T-64 family to the level of the T-84U tank. To this end, in the course of repair and modernization, new engines, a new fire control system and sighting devices, a Knife dynamic protection, as well as a set of other equipment, were received.

In numerous and not always objective comparisons with other tanks, the T-64BM vehicle regularly received good marks. Special praise was given to the protection system, in particular the dynamic protection "Knife". Serial re-equipment of existing tanks in accordance with the new project was launched in 2004 year. Earlier, the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine planned to upgrade T-400 tanks to 64, however, limited financial capabilities forced to seriously reduce the order. In 2004, a contract was signed to update the 85 T-64 production tanks. The first batch of 56 Bulatov was handed over to troops in 2008. By 2012, the number of these tanks reached 76.

Since the beginning of July, reports began to appear on the use of T-64BM tanks in battles with Luhansk and Donetsk "terrorists". Already 13 July was destroyed the first of the machines of this type. Active participation in the battles of the 1-th separate tank brigade, armed with Bulaty, may indicate that the loss of this type of equipment will continue. Further operation of this type of equipment in conditions of real conflict will allow to understand its real potential and effectiveness. Nevertheless, it is already clear that the effectiveness of the use of tanks of all models will be directly related to the level of crew and command training, and it leaves much to be desired.


On the materials of the sites:
http://andrei-bt.livejournal.com/
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/
http://armor.kiev.ua/
http://segodnya.ua/
video about "shot from NSVT" tank T-64BV, crew story:

Author:
45 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. UzRus
    UzRus 22 July 2014 08: 40
    +7
    That's right - there is nothing that could not be knocked out / damaged / broken. And who will say what lies in front of the right caterpillar of the tank in the second picture? In general, the impression is that there are different tanks in the photo, no?
    1. Dazdranagon
      Dazdranagon 22 July 2014 08: 48
      +2
      Quote: UzRus
      In general, the impression is that there are different tanks in the photo, no?
      - No, if you look closely at the right front roller, the protection is equally folded! hi
      1. Azzzwer
        Azzzwer 22 July 2014 11: 11
        -1
        Quote: Dazdranagon
        - No, if you look closely at the right front roller, the protection is equally folded!
        the protection is thrown over the right one, but in the upper photo, the right caterpillar is torn, and in the lower left
        1. Free wind
          Free wind 22 July 2014 14: 18
          +4
          the top photo is left, and the bottom photo is left. it is the same tank. Well, at least pay attention to the rollers. The caterpillar was knocked out on a standing tank. when removing the goose on the go, the tank may travel some distance before the tank unfolds. on a hard surface, on the surface there is a trace of skid. leaving the caterpillar far behind. On the same tank, the caterpillar slid a little off the sloth. and with an asterisk. that is, the breakdown of the goose happened on top, on a stationary tank.
      2. avdkrd
        avdkrd 22 July 2014 11: 33
        +1
        Quote: Dazdranagon
        - No, if you look closely at the right front roller, the protection is equally folded!

        along the way this is one tank from different angles
        1. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 24 July 2014 11: 01
          +2
          Vaunted protection "Knife": the entire tower is bare (complete absence of DZ boxes, only mountings remain from them). Dz boxes should not detonate either from fire, or from bullets and shrapnel. Only the box through which the cumulative jet passes should explode. And here, it seems, all protection detonated one-time.
      3. plotq
        plotq 29 July 2014 22: 36
        0
        Well, of course, different, who are you treating ?!
  2. zvo
    zvo 22 July 2014 08: 44
    +6
    Any technique in the hands of a savage - a pile of scrap metal
    1. starochkin77
      starochkin77 22 July 2014 16: 14
      +1
      The technique in the hands of the monkey is DEAD !! hi laughing
  3. Akos28
    Akos28 22 July 2014 08: 49
    +1
    Quote: UzRus
    . And who will say what lies in front of the right caterpillar of the tank in the second picture?

    I dare to suggest from a piece of g ... in detail!
  4. Stiletto
    Stiletto 22 July 2014 09: 02
    +2
    Everything that is once done, one day can also be or will be destroyed. This applies to ANY technique in principle. So there is nothing surprising, except for the methods of "putting things in order" by the Ukrop "peaceful protestors".
  5. Pollang
    Pollang 22 July 2014 09: 17
    +1
    With an initiative of you, Gleb Georgievich!
  6. nvn_co
    nvn_co 22 July 2014 09: 29
    +1
    As the saying goes: "Give a fool ... a glass one, so he ... breaks and cuts his hands," which, by the way, the ukrarmia does very well - and break and cut.
  7. Wedmak
    Wedmak 22 July 2014 09: 39
    +3
    And what if, the car was deprived of the course, and then stupidly shot from the ZU-23? A flurry of shells will blow all the external bells and whistles, after which it is no longer a tank, but a tractor.
  8. bnk204
    bnk204 22 July 2014 09: 41
    +2
    and who knocked out tanks, who are these heroes? awards to them and so that they know the names of the heroes
  9. Kars
    Kars 22 July 2014 09: 47
    +6
    There is one more photo.

    For me, the tank underwent a massive shelling. Including several pturs - one of which got into the stern of the tower, in the laying of spare parts and ammunition.

    There is also the likelihood of a knife falling into the DZ, which worked, and most likely repelled the threat. A caterpillar was later shot down, the tank lost its mobility and the crew left it preliminarily, so that the militia would not get in a more or less working condition.
    1. Kars
      Kars 22 July 2014 09: 49
      +3
      Another simple T-64BV with a characteristic turret stern and burning a zip box and OPVT pipes
    2. Crang
      Crang 22 July 2014 10: 55
      +5
      Kars - didn't you knock it out? Come on, work too. Do not sit. That would not become a slave to the United States.
    3. Kars
      Kars 22 July 2014 15: 58
      +5
      Naliz Boyu vid Butusova

      "The convoy was on the highway. Having come under enemy fire, the convoy stopped. However, three T-64BM Bulat tanks continued to move, trying to identify enemy firing points. They were not supported by infantry. The artillery observer also did not reveal the enemy's position, and open artillery fire did not As a result, the tanks continued to move without support, and came under fire from small groups of enemy infantry equipped with RPG-7 grenade launchers.The fire was opened from the sides, repelling the attack of the enemy, who freely maneuvered in the roadside bushes, the tankers themselves, of course, As a result, each tank received at least 4-5 RPG hits on the sides. Due to the fact that the enemy fired without resistance, the effectiveness of the fire was high. After the reactive armor was shot off, the tank in the photo was hit in the engine , the explosion occurred on the radiator grill. The automatic fire extinguishing system could not bring down the flames. The tank completely burned down. Unfortunately yu, the driver did not have time to jump out of the car, who followed the commander's orders to the end ... He had to get out of the lower hatch, he went through the turret hatch when the tower was already completely engulfed in fire ...
      The crews of the other two tanks returned to their own without loss. The column went on. In the course of further movement, the paratroopers lost an armored personnel carrier and a truck. Also shot at close range from the RP "



      https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=805106396196325&set=a.479663955407239.11
      6013.100000909172681 & type = 1
      1. Crang
        Crang 22 July 2014 18: 26
        +5
        Quote: Kars
        He had to go out into the lower hatch, he went through the tower hatch when the tower was already completely engulfed in fire ... He did not have time.

        In this tank, a mechanic cannot climb into a tower without the help of other crew members. The photo shows that the gun is slightly turned away. There are no visible reasons for leaving the tank with a mechanical drive through its hatch.
        4-5 hits from the RPG-7 is somehow very sick for the newest model. Our old T-72Bs in Chechnya could withstand much more. The record was set by the T-72S (export model T-72b), which withstood 17 (!) Hits from RPGs (RPG-7, RPG-18) and still managed to break through to its own. This indicates a rather low level of protection by modern standards for these new T-64BM2 Bulat tanks.
        1. Kars
          Kars 22 July 2014 21: 48
          +1
          Quote: Krang
          In this tank, a mechanic cannot climb into a tower without the help of other crew members

          with difficulties.
          Quote: Krang
          There are no visible reasons for leaving the tank with a mechanical drive through its hatch.

          And what do you think should be?
          Quote: Krang
          4-5 hits from RPG-7 are somehow very frail for the latest model.

          Quote: Krang
          who survived 17 (!) hits from RPGs (RPG-7, RPG-18

          It’s all about the luck and experience of the shooter, you can burn the T-90A from the ORPG-26 with one hit, you just need to know the place and a little bit of luck.

          Quote: Krang
          This indicates a rather low level of protection by modern standards for these new T-64BM2 Bulat tanks.

          This does not prove anything - especially when you consider that two of the three tanks left having retained the crews and combat readiness.

          For completeness of the experiment, it would be interesting to send the triple T-72Б3 along the same route
          1. Crang
            Crang 23 July 2014 06: 30
            +2
            Quote: Kars
            with difficulties.

            Not like at all. How many cases of death of mechanics in these tanks.
            Quote: Kars
            And what do you think should be?

            A gun directly above the hatch.
            Quote: Kars
            This does not prove anything - especially when you consider that two of the three tanks left having retained the crews and combat readiness.
            For completeness of the experiment, it would be interesting to send the triple T-72Б3 along the same route

            They would have smashed everything there.
            1. Kars
              Kars 23 July 2014 09: 15
              +1
              Quote: Krang
              Not like at all. How many cases of death of mechanics in these tanks.

              Have you personally tried it?
              Quote: Krang
              A gun directly above the hatch.

              And just that?
              Quote: Krang
              They would have smashed everything there.

              how in Grozny for the new year 1995?
              1. Crang
                Crang 23 July 2014 11: 16
                +2
                Well, in Grozny there were a lot of T-80BV, T-62M, etc., which are not as steep as the T-72B. And yes - then they smashed Grozny.
                Quote: Kars
                And just that?

                But only. In any other position of the tower (gun), the mechanic can get out through his hatch.
                Quote: Kars
                Have you personally tried it?

                I haven’t tried it, because it’s not worth trying. Everything is blocked by MOH cassettes. Which do not remove.
                1. Kars
                  Kars 23 July 2014 16: 07
                  +1
                  Quote: Krang
                  Well in Grozny there were a lot of T-80BV, T-62M, etc., which are not as cool as T-72

                  I don’t remember a lot of T-62 during the Christmas storm
                  Quote: Krang
                  But only. In any other position of the tower (gun), the mechanic can get out through his hatch.

                  And what? The option of jamming the hatch is not considered in principle?
                  Quote: Krang
                  I haven’t tried it, because it’s not worth trying. Everything is blocked by MOH cassettes. Which do not remove.

                  would have learned a mat part or something.
                  1. Crang
                    Crang 24 July 2014 07: 28
                    +2
                    Quote: Kars
                    I don’t remember a lot of T-62 during the Christmas storm

                    Well, not a little. There were even T-55AMs.
                    Quote: Kars
                    And what? The option of jamming the hatch is not considered in principle?

                    On the new tank? Only in case of direct contact with it. But he was gone. Hit the tower on the other side. Why should he wedge that?
                    Quote: Kars
                    would have learned a mat part or something.

                    You should.
                    1. Kars
                      Kars 24 July 2014 12: 01
                      +1
                      Quote: Krang
                      Well, not a little. There were even T-55AMs.

                      Can you prove what? A lot has been written about the New Year's assault?
                      Quote: Krang
                      On the new tank? Only in case of direct contact with it. But he was gone.

                      There were 6-7 hits
                      Quote: Krang
                      Hit the tower from the other side

                      With which, on the other? In the ZIP and OPVT boxes?
                      Quote: Krang
                      You should.

                      a mechanic can move from his place to the tower, especially in summer clothes.
        2. oledoyle
          oledoyle 26 July 2014 08: 49
          +1
          The survival of the A1 Abrams tank after 18 hits from the RPG-7 has been documented. Iran-Iraqi war. In fact, shots for RPGs are being improved))
  10. Tankomaster
    Tankomaster 22 July 2014 10: 06
    18
    Well, the author is a little wrong, the T-64 BM "Bulat" is a project of bringing the T-64B (T-64BV) tank to the level of the T-80UD, although the developments that were used on the T-84 were also used.
    But all the tanks developed in the USSR, and after them, machines based on them, were created for combined arms combat.
    The use of these tanks, without special training, for counterguerrilla operations is a crime. And using the army against your people is the genocide of your people.

    As correctly noted, the tank received several hits and completely burned out, but did not explode.
    On the right tower there are no spare stores for NSVT, their bracket is visible torn off next to the starboard side, which proves the correctness of the concept of protection against cumulative ammunition, so the main armor is not broken.
    There is also no spare parts box at the stern of the tower and the OPVT pipe lies on the MTO roof, but they could fall off as a result of the fire.
    The BM "Bulat" project itself is not bad in terms of cost-performance characteristics, but its use in the civil war is, I repeat, a crime.
    Is it possible to bring the BM "Bulat" tank and any other tank to conduct counter-guerrilla actions with greater efficiency, but perhaps only to great joy, there is no one to bring it, and who may not do it.
    1. padonok.71
      padonok.71 22 July 2014 10: 58
      +5
      That's right, but about partisan actions, I think not quite so. The militias are not exactly partisans, in the full sense of the word. And what they are doing can be attributed to partisan actions only with a very big stretch. "Partisanship" against the enemy's BT is primarily a "mine war", but here we see a normal contact battle.
      As for the photo, in the article - it looks like an ordinary parallel "green" ambush. Maybe even on the move. Why only BTukropy flooded across the field?, Substituting under the "green". And where was their guard? But this is the rhetoric.
    2. Locksmith
      Locksmith 22 July 2014 11: 25
      +5
      Quote: Tankomaster
      As correctly noted, the tank received several hits and completely burned out.

      if we draw the line of discussion in the middle, then we can assume the following option: the tank was skillfully knocked out by the militia, in order to "squeeze it out" and there was an attempt to take it out for restoration, but the valiant Air Force exits did not allow this to happen and shot a completely serviceable tank, precedents of this types have already been demonstrated.
  11. Crang
    Crang 22 July 2014 10: 53
    +3
    Quote: Tankomaster
    But all the tanks developed in the USSR, and after them, machines based on them, were created for combined arms combat.

    And in the east of Ukraine, combined arms battles are taking place. There have already been several tank battles.
    Quote: Tankomaster
    Well, the author is a little wrong, the T-64 BM "Bulat" is a project of bringing the T-64B (T-64BV) tank to the level of the T-80UD, although the developments that were used on the T-84 were also used.

    The correct name of the T-64BM2 "Bulat" tank destroyed in the photo. There was also just a T-64BM created during the Soviet era. It differed from the T-64BV with the 6TD engine.
    Quote: Tankomaster
    As correctly noted, the tank received several hits and completely burned out, but did not explode.

    It didn’t explode just because the crew managed to open the hatches and the energy of the combustion of gunpowder in the Ministry of Defense and the combat unit found a way out. It always happens. If the hatches were closed at the moment of ignition of the MOH, the tower would be torn off. The tank lies on its belly, which indicates that the torsion bar has completely melted from the heat.
    1. Tankomaster
      Tankomaster 22 July 2014 12: 30
      +2
      Actually, the correct name for this tank is BM "Bulat" (http://morozov.com.ua/rus/body/bulat.php) because in the Square they thought that indicating the T-64 is a reminder of the USSR and gave their name.
      Although everyone basically writes the T-64 BM "Bulat", paying tribute to the tradition of the T-64.
      Just like many people confuse the T-84 and the BM "Oplot", although they were all created on the basis of the T-80UD.
      But there is also an object number for BM "Bulat" is 447AM1, there was also a variant of 447AM2.
    2. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 22 July 2014 14: 12
      +5
      In fact, torsion bars are made from alloy steels and, in principle, they cannot melt. Just because of the thermal effect, the torsion bars lost their elasticity (tempering steel) and the machine sank.
    3. oledoyle
      oledoyle 26 July 2014 08: 54
      0
      Please, about tank battles - in more detail!
  12. Kulneff2009
    Kulneff2009 22 July 2014 10: 55
    +1
    The account is open! Good luck!
  13. PLO
    PLO 22 July 2014 10: 56
    +5
    most likely the tank was destroyed by a massive cynical and treacherous use of nuclear weapons, this is proved by a slightly bent side screen.
  14. Crang
    Crang 22 July 2014 11: 01
    -1
    Most likely he was destroyed by a blow to the stern of the tower. The T-64 and T-80 tower feed is generally weak. In the T-72, it seems to be narrowed with the formation of a wedge, even more powerful, but these are very bad.
  15. Mooh
    Mooh 22 July 2014 11: 51
    -1
    For some reason, the version of shooting by bumblebees is not considered. It really hurts all burnt, and you can’t see the holes.
    1. Orik
      Orik 22 July 2014 12: 17
      +1
      Quote: MooH
      For some reason, the version of shooting by bumblebees is not considered. It really hurts all burnt, and you can’t see the holes.

      A hole remains from the cumulative jet, which you will not see in such images.
    2. Crang
      Crang 22 July 2014 12: 53
      +2
      Quote: MooH
      For some reason, the version of shooting by bumblebees is not considered. It really hurts all burnt, and you can’t see the holes.

      Bumblebees do nothing to him.
      1. Mooh
        Mooh 22 July 2014 16: 21
        0
        Why not do it? Is he not sealed with rubber? This is not a collision, this is a question for an experienced person.
        1. uwzek
          uwzek 22 July 2014 17: 49
          +4
          The "bumblebee" flamethrower is not dangerous for a closed tank: a pressure above atmospheric pressure is maintained in the fighting compartment, and it is difficult for an aerosol of a volumetric explosion grenade to penetrate there. It is more difficult with the MTO compartment - air is actively sucked in there, but no less actively blown out. The shock wave from the volumetric explosion of the "bumblebee" flamethrower charge (the main damaging factor of such ammunition) is sustained by the tank by definition ...
        2. Crang
          Crang 22 July 2014 18: 30
          +5
          Maybe rubber, but in this case it is completely unimportant. The tank is sealed. All gaskets and oil seals deep in the armor. The cloud will not be able to penetrate. An explosion outside will not do anything. Also, all modern tanks have protection against napalm and other combustible mixtures.
          1. Mooh
            Mooh 22 July 2014 18: 41
            +2
            Thank you, I didn’t. I thought the question was in quantity and temperature.
            1. I do not care
              I do not care 22 July 2014 20: 34
              0
              Quote: MooH
              Thank you, I didn’t. I thought the question was in quantity and temperature.

              tanks from the end of 50 x were made to work in areas of nuclear explosions. Tightness (conditional) + special complex

              kt-necessary things. Thermobaric explosion of a tank on a banana, just do not care if only Papa star ...?
      2. 9lvariag
        9lvariag 4 August 2014 23: 48
        0
        There is a version of RPO - Z, which is not thermobaric. Are there "Lynx" flamethrowers in Cain's warehouses?
  16. bergberg
    bergberg 22 July 2014 12: 37
    +2
    According to intelligence from Novorossia, the tank was ambushed by two RPG-7 shots, the crew were shot as escort!
    1. Tankomaster
      Tankomaster 22 July 2014 12: 42
      +1
      It seems to be true, since the defeat from the blanks on the tank is not visible.
      And as you can see the partisan actions are quite effective against the technique ground for combined arms combat, which takes into account that the enemy is only in front .. and all the protection is only there, and the side projections and stern are protected from fragments and machine guns.
  17. Crang
    Crang 22 July 2014 14: 47
    +1
    Quote: Tankomaster
    against technology honed for combined arms combat, which takes into account that the enemy is only in front ..

    What nonsense. Show me the instructions in where the soldiers are required in "combined arms combat" stupidly and fanatically to shoot at the tank only in the forehead.
  18. Watchman
    Watchman 22 July 2014 15: 25
    +1
    There are 10 more "Oplots", but for some reason they are not allowed into battle.
    1. Tankomaster
      Tankomaster 22 July 2014 15: 31
      +1
      There is no "Oplot" in Ukraine, only there is one BM "Oplot", as an experimental vehicle at the KMDB.
      There were 10 T-84s of 2002 and they are already gone ... only one out of 10 remained.
  19. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 22 July 2014 17: 06
    +3
    Once again proves that the tank without infantry, but not in the open field, feels bad.
    This one is completely crippled. Plus to the militias.
  20. Garik1971
    Garik1971 22 July 2014 17: 44
    +3
    Ammunition can detonate, but there can be "jet combustion" - see Syria.
  21. Crang
    Crang 22 July 2014 18: 46
    +2
    Yes, a new page is opening in the history of the combat use of the T-64. Until the village, tanks of this series were used in Transnistria and a little in the Chechen campaign (T-64A).
  22. wanderer_032
    wanderer_032 22 July 2014 19: 31
    +2
    He’s happy in the video, he thinks he’s lucky the second time too. fool
    I contacted national gadgets, thinks that this is a suitable company ...
    The guy got brainwashed at you and the next time your remains will be buried with an excavator somewhere near the nearest forest belt. And no one will know where your grave is.
    And mom will say that he was missing.
  23. Cristall
    Cristall 22 July 2014 20: 47
    +2
    there are no invulnerable tanks, and even more so in a guerrilla war ... But what about the loss of the T72, that the loss of the Abrams in Iraq, still did not stop the armored fist.
    Do not write about the loss of the BTR 4, which is a newer technique (there was an article about damage). And T64 is an old man modernization. I think Kars is right-DZ withstood, but mobility is lost.
    The T64 Bulat itself is a fairly economical upgrade, so the tank is relatively cheap. By the amount of BTR 4, the most expensive equipment in the ATO zone.
    1. badger1974
      badger1974 23 July 2014 12: 55
      +1
      young lady, it’s not so simple here as it seems, there is such a trick as the T-64 technical task, it was exactly that way in the first cold one, and the technical task was to create a breakthrough tank, that is, the abundance of fire (the presence of an automatic loader), speed (availability pick-up, complicated running gear), and (notice) an increase in the reservation of the front projection due to all other projections,
      now what do we see
  24. serge siberian
    serge siberian 22 July 2014 21: 56
    0
    and where are the checkers? dp where is the armor? yes, and as I understood it, the modernization was stolen. They looked like they finished the standing machine.
  25. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 23 July 2014 02: 20
    +1
    No matter how destroyed. The main thing is destroyed. God grant that destroyed further.
    Ukram had to supply the tank with springs so that in case of danger it could bounce off the battlefield.
  26. Blinomordiques
    Blinomordiques 23 July 2014 02: 26
    +1
    Another one-time turret. Bggg.
  27. Tankomaster
    Tankomaster 23 July 2014 12: 13
    0
    I haven’t tried it, because it’s not worth trying. Everything is blocked by MOH cassettes. Which can not be removed. [/ Quote]

    "If you do not know - do not climb, if not special - do not say" the golden rules of tankers, everything is removed and there is a possibility of climbing, but only when the tower is on the move or at the stern, if it is turned, then you definitely will not climb .... ...
  28. pokermen
    pokermen 23 July 2014 14: 08
    +1
    The purpose of the attack was the enemy’s position at the heights near the village of Lutugino, Lugansk region.
    Lacking information about the enemy, the artillery opened harassing fire on the heights, but the density and intensity of the fire was low. The column was walking along the highway. Having come under enemy fire, the column stopped. However, three T-64BM Bulat tanks continued to move, trying to identify the enemy's firing points. They were not supported by infantry. The artillery observer also did not reveal the enemy's position, and open artillery fire could not suppress the firing points. As a result, the tanks continued to move without support and came under fire from small groups of enemy infantry equipped with RPG-7 grenade launchers. The fire was opened from the sides, the tankers themselves, of course, could not repel the attack of the enemy, who freely maneuvered in the roadside bushes. As a result, each tank received at least 4-5 RPG hits on the sides. Due to the fact that the enemy fired without opposition, the effectiveness of the fire was high. After the explosive reactive armor was shot off, the tank in the photograph was hit in the engine, an explosion occurred on the radiator grille.
    Damask steel was hit near Lugansk on July 13
    The automatic fire extinguishing system could not bring down the flame. the tank is completely burned out. Unfortunately, the driver didn’t get out of the car, who completely followed the commander’s orders ... He had to go out into the lower hatch, he went through the tower hatch when the tower was completely engulfed in fire ... He did not have time.
    The crews of two other tanks returned to their lossless. The column went on. In the course of further movement, the paratroopers lost an armored personnel carrier and a truck. Also shot at close range from an RPG
  29. badger1974
    badger1974 23 July 2014 15: 39
    +2
    I apologize for the absence, the first
    There is no 1 sharp offensive action in the armored fist, and this is precisely what is stipulated by the terms of reference for 64
    2-destroying 64-ku-you destroy the base, because 5 or 6 reverse opposites do not provide for repair, and even more so replacement with another motor, this twig is purely military for purely technical assignment of the first cold
    3- earring connection of a harp with a rubber hinge for positioning (position war) full F
    4-T-72 does not have these problems, any type V-2 engine is made in any civilian factory, exactly like a kingpin gusli
    and the 5th is of course the crew, everyone here in every way, but not Benderlog, because Benderlog crew is the most cowardly
  30. Kruglov
    Kruglov 24 July 2014 04: 21
    +1
    Well?! As they say - with a REASON !!! soldier And God help you!
  31. Inquisi
    Inquisi 29 July 2014 18: 10
    +1
    I hope not the last. It’s not on the Maidan with plkki jumping. No armor can protect here, since there are no brains.
  32. Konstantin Yu
    Konstantin Yu 23 March 2017 13: 52
    0
    ..... It would be interesting to get feedback from RPGeshnikov, did they notice any difference what to burn? Oplot, Bulat, and other anti-terrorist operation
  33. SASHA OLD
    SASHA OLD April 9 2017 11: 35
    0
    the technique is as good as its crew ...
  34. Mu Dialer
    Mu Dialer 28 August 2017 22: 04
    0
    Connection check.