Saving armor: tanks in Grozny

Fifteen years ago, on February 15, 6, the Russian army stormed the city of Grozny, victory in heavy street battles was ensured not least thanks to armored vehicles. Tanks in the city they are not always on fire from RPG hits, more about that in the photo selection from 42.TUT.BY.

It is believed that the T-80 tanks were not used in the second campaign. But if you look at the 1999-2000 reports, you can see footage from these combat vehicles. The tank proved to be excellent in battle: to disable T-80, 7-8 hits were required.

For three days of continuous battles, the T-72 with the hull number No. 611 received three hits from the Phagot ATGM and six hits from the RPG-7.

Tank T-72B number 611, rear view on the right side. Khankala, June 2000

The trace of the ATGM falling into the dynamic defense of the turret of the T-72B tank. Khankala, June 2000 d. Thanks to the DZ block, the armor was not pierced.

Tank T-72. A grenade fired from an RPG hit the fuel tank on the right fender, which swelled and exploded under the action of a cumulative jet. The crew is intact, the tank is combat-ready.

In the photo, the brewed hole from the cumulative PG-7 grenade in the stern sheet of the hull of the T-72B tank. After a brief repair, the tank is back in service.

Another hit of an RPG grenade in a fuel tank located on the right fender of the T-72. In addition to the tank itself, nothing was hurt.

The hinged dynamic protection elements mounted on rubber-metal side screens saved T-72 more than once from RPG and ATGM grenades.

T-72 before going to escort a transport column in the Vedeno Gorge. Boxes with cartridges for PKT machine guns, mounted on top of DZ blocks, play the role of additional screens.

T-62 with additional anti-cumulative screens. In the outdated T-62 there is no automatic loader, therefore there is a lot of free space inside. And if the hatches are open, then the cumulative ammunition does not create excess pressure in any way.

An additional armor protection of the turret, hull and bottom was installed on the T-62M tank, protecting the turret from an armor-piercing sifter, equivalent to a layer of homogeneous armor 320 mm thick, from cumulative projectiles - 400-450 mm.

Burnt T-62 of internal troops after the fighting in Grozny during the second Chechen campaign. The turret of the tank was reinforced by tracks to strengthen the defense. Twisted fragments of the roof of the MTO indicate that the engine of the tank exploded.

During the second Chechen campaign, Russian tank troops suffered much smaller losses - a higher level of professional training for servicemen was felt and the bitter experience of the first war in Chechnya was taken into account.

Comments

[rams]

An interesting selection.

[qwert]

And someone says that our tanks are nonsense ....

[apro]

Here is the answer to you that better combat stability of the tank is much higher.

[Dangerous]

Any tank is not bullshit. On the other hand, if you listen to the militia in the Donbas, how much they burn these 64x and 72x per day, then it seems that they are made of foil

[inkass_98]

Quote: Dangerous

if you listen to the militia in the Donbas

So after all, ukrovoyaki report daily about thousands of burned Russian tanks. That's the information war, to intimidate the enemy.

[-Dmitry-]

So after all, all sorts of premium Mercier, Ferrari, Lamborghini can be beaten in a couple of days - it all depends on the correct use.

[Mairos]

There, tank losses are greater from artillery fire, when it arrives from above.

[combat192]

Quote: Mairos

There, tank losses are greater from artillery fire, when it arrives from above.

Don't confuse real life and WOW! We will fire the tank "from above when it arrives". It was very, very problematic to destroy it even during the Second World War. And now too. A direct hit is required, preferably into the engine compartment. The Krasnopol type guided munitions are capable of this, which can only be used in conditions of direct visibility of the target for the operator of the laser illumination equipment.

[Mairos]

I do not confuse. With massive artillery fire across an area, for example, a "block", the probability of hitting a mine is not so small. )) Especially if the MLRS works in full "packages". even if it does not pierce, it can set it on fire (tanks, MTO).

[demon184]

APU is losing tanks due to low morale, poor training and dull use. When the army is ruled by Maidan upstarts, the army of any state will suffer huge losses. Remember the Chechen one, when tanks were shot almost in columns and the crews could not resist because they thought they were fighting with the civilians.

[enot73]

Quote: demon184

APU is losing tanks due to low morale, poor training and dull use.

There is positive experience with 64-k in Transnistria, against the Moldovan fascists .http: //topwar.ru/27882-t-64bv-v-boyu.html

[78bor1973]

APUs do not know how to use tanks - they charge full ammunition with most of the HE, most of the shells are expired and therefore the charges are not resistant to detonation, and the design of the AZ on the T-64 is quite vulnerable to hit.

[OlegLex]

What the hell is the foil, just like in the first Chechen one, the lack of professional tankers is affected,
in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, everything is still bad with the shots, even now they are leaving for the breakout from the boiler in a column, according to the shot directors, so they are bundled

[Gray 43]

Interesting article! Thank!

[Volga Cossack]

Eternal memory to the fallen tankers and glory to the living!

[Hyperion]

"And if the hatches are open, then the cumulative munition cannot create excessive pressure when it hits."
The author needs to learn the materiel.

[Bongo]

Quote: Hyperion

"And if the hatches are open, then the cumulative munition cannot create excessive pressure when it hits."

I read with interest before this phrase. To spoil the impression of a good selection, one absurdity is enough.

[Rus86]

most likely it means that there will be no additional damaging factor on the crew. or it will not be so significant. (It was mentioned that the PT76 was used intensively in Vietnam and the Indo-Pakistani conflict and not every hit could have taken it out of the M79 grenade launcher, not from the first. The large internal volume affected (for buoyancy). But it made its way through a burst of 12,7 with a guarantee. chance for the crew for additional time to complete a combat mission))

[Bongo]

Quote: Rus86

most likely it means that there will be no additional damaging factor on the crew. or it will not be so significant.

This is a common myth ... when penetrating the armor of a medium or main tank with cumulative ammunition, a significant pressure jump in the tank, which can cause barotrauma to the crew, does not occur.

[Rus86]

Well, if this is true, then I agree with you
"One absurdity is enough to spoil the impression of a good selection."

[Rus86]

read on courage. baro injuries when a cumulative jet is struck by a technique like a cold after a guillotine

[Morfius]

At our plant named after Degtyarev in Kovrov, a variety of birds are made. They told me that when they got into the tank, closed hatches tore off the fuck.

[Bongo]

Quote: Morfius

At our plant named after Degtyarev in Kovrov, a variety of birds are made. They told me that when they got into the tank, closed hatches tore off the fuck.

Listen to the stories less ...

[cast iron]

This is a common idiotic phrase "I was told that ....." Insert any nonsense instead of ellipsis.

[brn521]

A very useful myth. No matter how you screw the tank, whatever you weigh, but if the hatches are open, then one successful shot and you can pick up the tank for yourself.

[Bongo]

Quote: brn521

A very useful myth. No matter how you screw the tank, whatever you weigh, but if the hatches are open, then one successful shot and you can pick up the tank for yourself.

That's right. In the Middle East, it happened so many times when the Arabs went into battle with open hatches, so as to make it easier to jump out of the tank.

[Akuzenka]

Oh, physics is really bad .....

[78bor1973]

It was understood that the crew on the T-62 had more chances of survival and this technique was used on the T-34.

[cast iron]

There is written in black and white non-literate nonsense about the "jump" of pressure due to the cumulative jet.

[cast iron]

At the very beginning of the article, an illiterate author sings an ode to the T-80. In this case, the entire selection consists in showing pictures of one T-72 and a pair of three T-62. . There is very little information.

[Fotoceva62]

About the "T_64". The entire line of modern tanks from "T_72", "T_80", "T_90", "Bulat" grew out of a tank created by the leadership of the great Russian weapons designer
Morozov’s tank Kalashnikov. Under his leadership the Design Bureau UralVagonZavod was created, which the Uralians are trying to forget about in every way. All these tanks from the same line and in terms of protection do not fundamentally differ from each other. Now the old American infa about the T_64 in Iraq repeats itself like they explode, search the internet. The explosions of dill tanks are mainly due to the fact that long-expired ammunition is used which has lain in warehouses of 72-25 years.
BB (mainly used by TGA) decomposes and becomes unstable, and such powders do not benefit from gunpowder. Most photos from the Donbass show us tanks destroyed by heavy artillery shells. So it’s rare; the tank will reach the middle of the Dnieper;
can withstand a landmine hit. By the way, I would like to remind the author that the open hatches have not yet slept. Examine the damaging fakors of the cumulative jet and its characteristics.
The dynamic protection that has been stored in warehouses for decades in h ... n knows what conditions do not differ in resistance to detonation at a service life of five years.

In conclusion: Our tanks are the most warring in the world and the best.

[URAL72]

“Regarding“ T_64. ”The entire line of modern tanks grew out of a tank created by the leadership of the great Russian designer Morozov. Under his leadership, the Design Bureau UralVagonZavod was created, which the Urals are trying to forget in every way."

Not certainly in that way. UralVagonZavod was created even before the war as an enterprise for the production of tanks. Maybe it was not planned to have a strong design bureau on it, although you can't do without engineers. But in 41st, the design bureau had to be evacuated from Kharkov, and after the war it was decided to return it back, but at the same time leave the necessary personnel in N. Tagil. So Morozov is not the main thing here, Nikolai Kartsev created the design bureau by and large, but in general everything was decided by a resolution "from above" - ​​without an order from above, neither one nor the other would have created anything. Morozov was generally distinguished by a certain arrogance, considering Kartsev's design bureau second-rate, often putting spokes in the wheels and thereby harming the common cause. I personally consider both designers to be great Russian gunsmiths. And the T-64 became the basis for the T-72 forcedly, since it was successfully slipped to Khrushchev, although it was still a very damp machine, so damp that Kartsev went to great tricks, violating the order to launch it into series in N. Tagil.

[Kars]

Quote: URAL72

. And the T-64 became the basis for the T-72 forced,

http://flibusta.net/b/246356/read

And then it remains to be said that the T-72 appeared at the same time, or even before the T-64

Quote: URAL72

l on big tricks, breaking order

Of course, not violating, but nothing that they went over the mass, which was the main factor in the design of the T-64. Take away the requirements in limiting the mass of the medium tank in 36 tons in 1959, you would not have to go to such tricks.

[EvilLion]

As a result, Kartsev did the thing, and Morozov saved 2 tons of a heap of metal that no one in the world wanted to buy, was discontinued at 1987, and now in the first serious war on the remnants of Ukraine, the T-64 is simply tearing it to pieces.

[Kars]

Quote: EvilLion

As a result, Kartsev did a thing

Mobilization log, which in each modification was inferior in combat qualities to the T-64 modifications of the same year.

Quote: EvilLion

, and Morozov saving 2 tons

This general staff wanted to save money, and Karchev worked on the model of the T-64 and with permission to exceed the weight without creating anything special.

Quote: EvilLion

on the remnants of Ukraine T-64 just tears to pieces

And what is the difference in principle for a tank after a bomb explosion? Neglecting already about expired ammunition prone to greater detonation ..

Quote: EvilLion

he did not dry up before his disgraceful discontinuation in 1987.

and what was shameful in filming in 1987 when the T-80UD was appointed as a new single tank, and even UVZ were going to remodel for its production.

Quote: EvilLion

this T-64 was so crude that it took to create a T-72

T-72 is a mediocre way to install a V-shaped diesel.

[cast iron]

The T-64 is a clear indicator that an educated influential designer cannot convincingly argue with the government and the Ministry of Defense that it is impossible to create a 36-ton tank with normal protection.
The result of the design was:
- An unreliable undercarriage in real conditions. Inflating tracks on tanks during maneuvering.
- Serious vibrations while driving. Due to the design of the rollers. They are relatively small and are not normally rubberized.
- a more dangerous Loader Mechanism for the crew. It is inconvenient for the mechanic to quickly leave the vehicle through the tower hatches. Greater probability of hitting elements of destruction in the "carousel" of the loading mechanism than the T-72.
- crude 5TD engine not modified. Frankly sucks in the cold to this day. And most importantly, for industry it was more labor intensive and difficult to manufacture. And more expensive. This is an important factor.
- The control system and instruments for the T-64 were not designed by Morozov. This is to understand that the same MSA can be stuck in any tank if desired. At least in the T-55.
The only real advantage of the T-64 was the SLA. Otherwise, he lost the T-72 more than vice versa.
That is why the T-72 released much more.

[Kars]

Quote: cast iron

how an educated influential designer cannot convincingly argue to the government and the ministry of defense that it is impossible to create 36

Of course))) of the type Heavy tanks were not killed for the same parameter, limiting the weight in 50 tons

Quote: cast iron

That is why the T-72 released much more

actually because they are cheaper, and in large quantities went directly to the stock

Quote: cast iron

- The LMS and instruments for the T-64 were not designed by Morozov. This is to understand that the same MSA can be stuck in any tank if desired

That's something in the T-72 they pushed in last.

Quote: cast iron

more dangerous for the crew

for some reason it was transferred to the T-80, so it still stands there, despite a large number of modifications. Probably in Leningrad and Omsk they were not aware of the unreliability and danger.

[cast iron]

MZ has the same reliability as AZ. But he is more dangerous. It has a larger lateral projection area on the sides. This means that the MZ has a greater probability of getting hit by a destructive element in the ammunition rack of the "carousel". Moreover, vertically standing shells restrict the mechanic drive's access to the turret, which is critical in battle.
MOH transferred to the T-80 most likely on the basis of UNIFICATION. After all, the T-64, and not the T-72, was taken as the basis. It is logical that it was with the T-64 that they tried to transfer most of the components and assemblies.

[EvilLion]

What kind of nonsense, this T-64 was so crude that it took to create a T-72 and never dried up before its shameful withdrawal from production in the 1987.

Khrushchev was filmed in 1964. Learn damn materiel.

[SARANCHA1976]

the front sheet is torn out when the front fuel tank explodes

[EvilLion]

The only thing that is true in your message is that the cumulative stream does not create any pressure, and open hatches = death of the crew from a land mine.

It is simply ridiculous to consider Morozov, who created nothing but the battle-worthy T-64, as tank Kalashnikov, but he was not the only one to create the T-34.

[Tummyr]

it's certainly old (words), but it all depends on the crew

[s1н7т]

Still, at first everything depends on the senior commander - how he will prepare the l / s and equipment, how he will plan the battle, how he will solve the issue with the "allies", there are many more "how", and the crew whether or not will complete the task depends, of course, on him. Although for the BUSV this is all sedition, it mainly features "combined arms combat." For those who are not in the subject - combined arms does not mean infantry, but almost the opposite

[padonok.71]

During actions in the city, it’s important not only to train the crew, but also cover / assault / landing groups, call it what you like, as the second company proved.

[brn521]

DZ certainly helps, but does not guarantee. Using the example of the first Chechen, if two are Chechens, then one shots from a RPG-7 with a DZ block, the second immediately sculpts there. If one is Chechen, then either the barrel of the gun will be perforated or the optics will be demolished. Learning decides a lot.

[Mairos]

Have you shot a lot from a grenade launcher? I am a lot. Try about a hundred meters, at least not even get into the DZ block, but into a certain area (for example, a side projection of the MTO) of a moving tank. Especially if they will work for you too. Throw these army fables to bear about the targeted penetration of the gun barrel. An RPG is far from a sniper rifle.

[Petrik66]

I agree, especially impresses with the sniper shot of the second Chechen. Tales of the old soldier ......

[Mairos]

In approximately the same way, tales from "eyewitnesses" about the destruction of entire battalions of the GRU special forces in the Donetsk AP are born. And go and prove to some that this is nonsense! After all, the participants in the events told them. As a bonus, during the Second World War, at one time, army tales wandered that the Germans made gasoline from water in the field as a kind of "powder". )) They really had a powder, but not for the "production of gasoline", but for the disinfection of water.

[xan]

Quote: brn521

then one shot from the RPG-7 removes the DZ block, the second immediately sculpts there.

What kind of polygon conditions are these? RPG is a chtoli sniper rifle? From an RPG in combat conditions, destroying a tank is very difficult, almost impossible, only if in the village, and if the tank is without infantry support.
Like it or not, but without tanks anywhere. And the age of tanks will not end long.

[Seraphimamur]

then one shot from the RPG-7 removes the DZ block, the second immediately sculpts there.

Complete nonsense.

[PSih2097]

Quote: brn521

DZ certainly helps, but does not guarantee. For example, the first Chechen, if two Chechens, then one shot from the RPG-7 removes the DZ block, the second immediately sculpts there.

if it’s from an ATGM, then theoretically it is possible, from any RPG - definitely NO even from 50 meters into a standing tank ...

[Cheget]

probably from the experience of playing in world of tanks

[vova1973]

nonsense. try to get to the same place with a grenade launcher.

[Lex]

Well, as far as I remember the statistics on Chechnya (I read the research somewhere), most of the defeats of tanks from RPGs are due to numerous defeats of equipment from different sides (not the frontal projection). Those. 1 tank is fired by several people from different directions. I'm afraid to make a mistake, but the numbers were announced more than 5-6 hits per unit of disabled equipment.
Plus I will repeat once again my already expressed example on this forum. In battles near the Red Beam, 1 APU tank was stopped only after more than 10 hits from a variety of RPGs. By the way, the most successful then was considered to be a hit from Bumblebee, after which the tank stopped firing - then it was believed that the tower was jammed, or simply destroyed the crew ...
Plus, the real absence of excess pressure in the reserved space of cumulative ammunition does not guarantee the destruction of even one BMP or armored personnel carrier from a single hit. A lot depends on exactly where you hit it and how it got through (how metal spray flew).
I myself studied this topic after I was convinced by personal experience that even the old Soviet equipment is still very tenacious in real combat. As an example, an enemy BMP-2 received several hits from grenade launchers, shot at point blank range from a cliff, received a couple of hits from 30mm weapons (2a42), but ... safely crawled away from the battlefield and died out nearby due to a jammed engine.

[Goodvin55]

"In the outdated T-62 there is no automatic loader, so there is a lot of free space inside. And if the hatches are open, then the cumulative ammunition cannot create excessive pressure when it hits."

To author-2, out of class, to learn physics, it has already been said a thousand times that the couma does not create any pressure (or rather, the pressure created is so little that it can be neglected), the couma causes a high-explosive effect, which increases with OPEN HATCHES, so hatches must be kept CLOSED.

[Argon]

It would be more correct to say battened down. I completely agree with you, as well as with the above comments. I had a chance to communicate with one Serb who survived the hit of a cumulative grenade (which one, he does not know) into his tank (T-54 Czech production, it is mechanical water). The hatches of the driver and the operator were battened down, and the commander's hatch was simply closed (he often had to protrude, to coordinate actions with the covering group, since its technical-tv fighters had no communication) .As a result of the hit, the operator was killed directly by the jet, the gunner shell-shocked (claimed to have seen - "glowing blue pin" -) plus minor shrapnel wounds, water-fur-light concussion. But the commander was thrown out of the tank (as the infantrymen said, he threw 6-7 meters, they didn't even understand from the beginning, The tank did not lose mobility, having gone into cover, the crew received medical assistance. The commander was brought by the infantry, he died half an hour later, multiple fractures, including the spine, internal bleeding.

[cast iron]

Oh, these storytellers about the increase in pressure from breaking through a cumulative stream))

[Onharon]

how many people bent interestingly because of open hatches. Does anyone read foreign forums there is also a common myth about over pressure cum jet?

[Pacifist]

Nice selection ... only this

And if the hatches are open, then there is no way to create excessive pressure on the cumulative ammunition when hit.

starts to get already. If a cumulative jet enters the reserved space, the damage factor is not a pressure injury ... I will not arrange an educational program, but read at least, if not physical calculations, then at least general materials for understanding ... well, at least here http: // otvaga2004. com / armiya-i-vpk / armiya-i-vpk-vzglyad / kumulyativnyj-mif /

[brn521]

Quote: Mairos

Throw these army fables to bear about the targeted penetration of the gun barrel.

I have the assets of participants' bikes + instruction on RPG7, which means that the median deviation of the PG-7VM at a distance of 100m is 10cm. And this is already something.

Quote: Mairos

in a certain area (for example, a side projection of the MTO) of a moving tank.

...

Quote: Mairos

Especially if they will work for you too.

Abstract tanks in the open field against the abstract infantry, which is seated in the trenches? No, I'm about the first Chechen one. Mountain and city conditions. Nomads with machine guns, SVD and RPGs.

[Rakti-kali]

An article of the level "kindergarten" Sopelka ". Moreover, it is a free retelling of the already former article about the combat use and survivability of tanks in battles on the territory of the Chechen Republic.
Some gems of the article were "killed":

It is believed that the T-80 tanks were not used in the second campaign. But if you look closely at the reports of 1999-2000, you can see frames with these combat vehicles.

And not a single one confirming this powerful statement of the frame. Because it is difficult to look for a black cat in a dark room, especially if she is not there.

And if the hatches are open, then there is no way to create excessive pressure on the cumulative ammunition when hit.

With such woeful warriors, I personally would have beaten off the tower. Flowing of a wave of excess pressure into the BTT is possible ONLY through open hatches or, if it is a thin-armored vehicle, through breaks in the armor. Through the hole pierced by a cumulative jet, the VID does not flow into the tank.

Distorted fragments of the MTO roof indicate that the tank engine exploded.

What a powerful engine ... Or the author’s brain exploded ... Detonated an ammunition shell near the MTO wall. The partition itself is quite thin, so it was broken and torn down by everything that was over the MTO, well, along the way, the tower was also removed from the shoulder strap.

[vladkavkaz]

Rakti-kali
T80 tanks, the first company in the Czech Republic, were used.
Near the station, there was an evil mind about him, there were two such cars. The stupid ones couldn’t start them ..
Near the Lenin Park, on the SPPM, there was a T72 tank, in which, in the armor, just below the sight-seeing device of the driver, a neat hole, a cumulative defeat, the crew remained all inside ...
The time I am writing about is January 1-7, 1995, a witness to that ..

[Rakti-kali]

Quote: vladkavkaz

T80 tanks, the first company in the Czech Republic, were used.

And I do not argue with this (133 guards from, as an example), but the author writes about the second campaign.

[vladkavkaz]

Rakti Kali (
In the second, 80s, I definitely did not observe anywhere. PT76, T62, T72, and that's it.

[egor670]

I remember when our tanks entered Grozny (the first war), information about large losses of armored vehicles flashed through the central channels, literally in a day about a hundred pieces. Then they covered up information about it. Maybe the participants in those events come here, let them clarify, if something is wrong?

[cast iron]

Information about the fight since December 31, 1994 in the public domain. To put it simply, a column of tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers entered Grozny just right through the streets. Moved to the touch, because There were no detailed maps of the city. One large group of BTTs occupied the station and buildings near it without a fight. And then it defended 2 or 3 days (I don’t remember exactly). They burned all the equipment. And these are dozens of units. Another column was already gouged in the city from all sides.
Personally, Yeltsin, who gave the order, Pasha Grachev, who approved the "operation", and the bastards-generals on the ground, are guilty of this meat grinder. It is a crime to enter the city in a marching column, which is overrun with up to 15 bearded thugs with RPGs. Sabotage at the level of senior command personnel. No one was imprisoned, no one was punished. Because Russia has been ruled since 000 by bandits, speculators and blackmail.

[Anatole]

A couple of years ago I watched the plot on the first channel. It was said in black and white that on the night before entering Grozny, the glove box had a full layout of all plans, up to the number and directions of entry into the city, US intelligence provided. The guys just stupidly met in pre-prepared positions.

[cast iron]

No need to blame the USA. Our generals and the government themselves were taken to slaughter. Marching columns, without maps and without well-coordinated personnel of the city are not being stormed. This is schizophrenia in its purest form.

[Cynic]

Quote: cast iron

Marching columns, without maps and without well-coordinated personnel of the city are not being stormed.

What an assault?
What are you speaking about ?
Reality has changed, and these still lived on past illusions. Unfortunately, it’s not they who pay the power of those in power for illusions.

[cast iron]

What are the illusions? The local generals understood everything perfectly. According to the KGB, Grozny was flooded with 15 militants. To enter the city with a marching column is a deflection under Yeltsin and the other farmers in order to maintain their general’s chair.

[Cynic]

Quote: cast iron

What are the illusions?

Ordinary, otherwise, it is not necessary to recall EBN and others like him in a haste, this is complete unprofessionalism, which can be treated only by radical methods _

[padonok.71]

Many crews kept hatches open / open / not on the stopper, not because of some kind of pressure (they did not even know about it), but banal because of "what to see", since PB requires a skill - many did not have it.

Quote: vladkavkaz

Czechs by stupidity, could not get them ..

Yes, Nokhchi are not at all friendly with equipment. What to take, savages. As of September 1996, according to the RSG General Staff, there were 2-3 tanks (of an unknown type, but most likely 72k) in service with the fighters in the Grozny region. In November 1997, armed with the "Armed Forces of the CRI", tanks -0. Broke, and fix it - fig.

[vladkavkaz]

padonok.71
I would not say that they are not friends with technology.
Equipment has the property of breaking down, but for obvious reasons, they did not have spare parts for sophisticated equipment, plus the competent work of our controllers ... believe me, I know what I’m talking about, the result, in the SHALI in the former tank regiment, from tanks that are quite capable of fighting, there were only corps, everything else was stolen ..
But they could apply it and applied it qualitatively ...

[igorka357]

Very old photos, I saw them about ten years ago !!!!

[Cheget]

a good article ... I remember talking about the fact that the tanks burned like matches in Chechnya ... the author explains that this is not so ... also be informed that the dz blocks were empty without explosives and did not save. It is true, who knows?

[Cheget]

there was a myth that if you throw a grenade f-1 on an armored personnel carrier, then with the hatches closed, there is an end for everyone and therefore the hatches open just in case ...

[cast iron]

myths breed the uneducated. The more emotional and delusional the myth, the more other monkeys-listeners believe in this myth. And then the crowd effect. After all, a crowd of uneducated monkeys "cannot be mistaken" !!! Oh how! ))))

[Massik]

Nothing about the article, a bunch of blunders described above +

Burnt down T-62 of internal troops after fights in Grozny

What are the tanks of the internal troops ???? Are you the author, even though the states are interested, it’s not such a mystery behind 7 seals.

[vladkavkaz]

Massik
If you don’t know what was or was in service with the RF Armed Forces, this does not mean that the tanks did not stand at the arsenal of the RF Armed Forces, from the PT76, to t62,99 and 100 divisions of the Don, they included tank battalions.
In the Czech Republic, on blocks along the Grozny-Gudermes highway, stood PT76.

[Terrible ensign]

I had a comrade in the Caucasus in the BB who served as a tankman and it was at 62nd.

[stabskapitan]

We had a tank battalion of 100 DON (Novocherkassk). The division consisted of 3 operational regiments, a tank regiment (later reduced to a tank battalion), and military support units. In the winter of 2006, it was reorganized into 50 OBRON, one operational regiment was reorganized into the SMVCh regiment, the tank battalion was reduced in full force, and 4 separate artillery battalions were transferred to 46 OBRON.

[Cornet77]

They also didn’t steal and drank explosives from mounted and built-in DZ blocks. This time.
And the second, they remembered that there was a BUSV and began to tactically use the tanks. and in urban battles. The result did not fail to affect.

[s1н7т]

Quote: Cornet77

And the second, they remembered that there is a BUSV

If you knew about him from the very beginning, probably everything would not be so terrible. But, as I understand it, military expediency was not determined at all by the military. In time, I quit, however.

[padonok.71]

I would say. Friends are those who are normal. Who studied at a vocational school / technical school / institute, who love and want to work. There are many handy ones among them. Excellent builders, mechanics, and what roofers, tinsmiths! And among those who want to "do an independent Islamic state" with arms in hand, normal techies nemae, so change the batteries in the radio, and sharpen the knife.

[padonok.71]

Something my android dies. Answer to the respected Vladkavkaz. I disagree with you, or rather, I do not quite agree.

[vladkavkaz]

Yes, everything is fine. It is clear that the bulk of the gangs were literate ... not at odds, especially with technical literacy.
And with the rest, I agree.

[priest58]

for all those who argue about open hatches: I would like to recall that during the Second World War, during the storming of cities, our tankers still closed the hatches (as usual infantry grenades flew into them more than once), but they never locked them for the convenience of leaving the tank ( just like in the song: the car is in flames, now the ammunition will explode, but I’d like to live like that and there’s no urine to get out of)
As for the survival of tanks, I completely agree with Cornet77: explosives from a remote sensing system in place + BUSW can work wonders.

[aba]

Yes! Very good selection!

[Next year]

A mediocre article.

[special]

And what ... tanks in the city did?

[Rakti-kali]

Quote: special

And what ... tanks in the city did?

We fought. What's so surprising?

[cast iron]

Your nickname does not match your knowledge. Cities take tanks if you did not know. Read about taking Berlin and Köningsberg at your leisure.

[Robert Nevsky]

Very interesting article!