Military Review

Ukrainian armored

195
The other day, the community of "Slavoukrainian" patriots received a hefty impulse and cause for shouting. The reason was the statement of "Ukroboronprom" on the development of a "completely new self-propelled artillery mount based on tank "Hold".


Ukrainian armored


The main feature of the new weapons will be a powerful 155-mm howitzer, produced by one of the NATO countries. Germany, if specifically.

In "Ukroboronprom" seriously believe that this will allow the Ukrainian army to gain an advantage during artillery duels in the war in the Donbass. If we translate from Ukrainian to generally understood, then in the coffin we saw all these Minsk papers there, we must prepare for a serious war.

The noise was serious, shouting in the networks as if in January these wonderful cars would take up positions near Donetsk. However, the reality is somewhat less beautiful.

Everything would be fine, but the details of this project cause (however, as always in the Ukrainian topic) a slight surprise and bewilderment.

In principle, the idea of ​​wow: gash on the chassis "stronghold" (T-64) w / h of the German art PzH 2000. In principle, the parameters of the shells coincide in length-width, 7075 / 3400 in the "Oplot" and 7870 / 3480 in the German howitzer.

However, not the dimensions cause the greatest surprise, and the motor layout. In "Oplot" it is a classic, that is, the engine is located in the rear. And at PzH 2000 ahead. And how this problem is thought to be solved at the XTZ is not clear at all. About such difficult issues as the recoil momentum, which is uniquely different for a tank and an ACS, I just keep silent.

But if they took up the task, apparently, there are ideas. Here, if you look a little ahead, it is not the result that is important, but the process. For the presence of the process implies financing, which means, at a minimum, a salary.

But let's look a little further. And then we have what? Right, shells. The "German" caliber NATO. 155 mm. Ukraine still sits on the Soviet 152 mm. What will shoot in case of successful gash?

Yuri Pashchenko, Deputy Director General for Production, Ukroboronprom, reported the following on this topic:

"Everything depends on the needs of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, if they order a large quantity of ammunition, then it will be more profitable for us to deploy our own production. If in the near future only a few dozen of such systems will be supplied, then it is more profitable for us to buy shells abroad. In any case, after the emergence of sustainable needs will be decided on the issue of its production. "

Right here, everything becomes clear and understandable. "Only a few dozen systems" means that shells will have to be purchased. As well as the howitzers themselves. The issue of financing arises in all its glory.

And the matter is not only in money. The point is the possibility of setting up the issue. Quietly and almost imperceptibly, the message about the unilateral termination of the contract for the supply of "Vouchers" to Thailand has slipped.

In 2011, Ukraine won the tender for the supply of 49 machines of the Thai army. The contract expired in December 2015. At the tender, “Oplot” successfully overcame both T-90C1, and Chinese “Type 95”, and “Abrams”. But for 4 of the year, the army of Thailand received as many 6 (SIX) machines.

Who said that in Thailand there live simpletons who can hang buckwheat or rice noodles on their ears for several years? The reaction is quite adequate, since the prospect of ever getting the ordered tanks naturally ordered to live long. As Ukraine “forgives” to all whom it owes, everyone has already seen for a long time. And every day less and less willing to be convinced by personal experience.

One more example. In December of this year, Pakistan announced its intention to hold a tender for the purchase of 200 tanks for its army. Naturally, Ukrainian manufacturers rushed headlong to participate in the tender. 200 tanks - this is not a comic order, it is a lot of money.

It is strange, but for some reason, the Pakistani military gently, but at the same time, lucidly made it clear that participation in the “Oplot” competition is not supposed. Pakistan needs tanks, not a process. To attack the Thai rake in the form of cheapness "Oplota" compared with colleagues from Russia or China and failure to receive the ordered? Alas.

Really produced and delivered in time by the T-90 or "Type 95", albeit more expensive, Pakistanis seem to be a more promising option.

Such are the battlegrounds of the Ukrainian defencists.

Yes, the headlines of the articles in ukroSMI were simply screaming: “The army of Ukraine will receive the latest NATO self-propelled howitzer based on the Oplot tank !!! Fear and tremble all! Especially Donbass and Russia. Everyone, like, we will win.

And so very little: Ukroboronprom announced the development of a completely new self-propelled artillery unit based on the Oplot tank.

Here are the keywords: "announced the development." About the time when the miracle weapon will throw thunder and lightning on the heads of the residents of Donbass, not a word. Not a word.

From here, only one conclusion can be made. The coming years 10 can all sleep peacefully. Wonderful howitzer will be developed. And if it is developed as quickly as the Oplot and Bulat, then the question for whom it will be used and in which army remains open.

And at the end historical analogue. 70 years ago, one activist also promised to defeat everyone with a “miracle weapon” if not tomorrow, then the day after tomorrow for sure. Doesn’t resemble anything? That reminds me.

And there believe.

"The NATO standard 155-mm howitzers are significantly superior to existing and even planned Russian developments. Shells of the new Ukrainian artillery will be able to fly farther and have more destructive power than Russian-made 152-mm and 122-mm artillery systems.
So, a self-propelled MSTA-S, caliber 152-mm shoots only 25 kilometers, while the German 155-mm artillery system PzH 2000 - 30 kilometers. "

"The new howitzer will allow the Ukrainian troops to fire at a range that will not give the enemy a chance to strike back. So, it will not only save the lives of our soldiers, but also significantly increase the effectiveness of Ukrainian artillery."

The whole question is when? Will there be a Ukrainian army at all, and I would not have looked so far with Ukraine either. Although an optimist like, but not as much ...

And the last. I understand the joy of all the glory of Ukrainians on the subject of peremoga "Germans" over our "Msta", but my dear, are you talking about the "Coalition" that you did not hear at all? And she is ...



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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. AlNikolaich
    AlNikolaich 29 December 2015 06: 59 New
    35
    So the conversation is not about the new artillery system! And first of all, about how to use this money, cut it and share it! Nothing personal! Ukrobusiness!
    1. Kars
      Kars 29 December 2015 10: 45 New
      +1
      Something article is some kind of strana. Obviously, Ukroboron prom needs to be cried out. But they couldn’t bring any arguments. The main problem is funding. Will it then Western companies will certainly help.

      However, not the dimensions are most surprising, but the motor layout. At "Oplot" it is classic, that is, the engine is located in the rear. And PzH 2000 is ahead. And how it is thought to solve this problem at KhTZ is not yet clear at all. About such complex issues as the recoil impulse, which the tank and self-propelled guns are uniquely different, I will simply keep silent.
      This passage generally caused emotion. The position of the engine changes without problems. And I have not heard of special problems with the recoil impulse from Msta-s, which is similar to the same chassis (t-80)
      More professionally necessary, like that.


      Only one conclusion can be drawn from this. The coming years 10 everyone can sleep peacefully. A miracle howitzer will be developed. And if it will be developed as quickly as the Oplot and Bulat, then the question of who it will be used in and in which army remains open.


      But what's the problem with the timing of the development of the Bastion and Bulat? And then the Germans may well sell the art part of Donnar. Give me only money.
      1. engy
        engy 29 December 2015 11: 12 New
        20
        By design, I agree with you. There are no special problems. True, the chassis with such a rework and the "Bastion" will be difficult to name. In general, the author correctly focuses on near-constructive topics. If such a machine can even be designed and manufactured as a prototype, then with the series it can turn out like with the BTR-4, now it’s still not clear to the end, with the contract with Thailand breaking. Zd Malysheva has handed down a lot lately. On the face of the inability to maintain mass production at a more or less high pace. True, KhTZ was mentioned in the article whether they were given this order, but they have not had mass production of military equipment since the beginning of the 90s. In any case, nothing is impossible, but here are the costs you will have to invest, or time to spend to make 50 pieces. of such machines depends on the truly Stalinist determination of the Ukroboronprom leadership.
        1. Kars
          Kars 29 December 2015 11: 29 New
          +1
          Quote: engy
          In any case, nothing is impossible, but here are the costs you will have to invest, or the time to spend to make 50 pcs. such machines

          If the Germans sell the art piece, then it’s not really that much. Depending on how much the leadership will steal.
          Quote: engy
          Now, it is still unclear to the end, with the severance of the contract with Thailand.

          We’ll wait for the official statements of Thailand. But there will be a gap. Meaning? It does NOT seem like Thailand needs 50 tanks right tomorrow.
          1. GRAY
            GRAY 29 December 2015 14: 02 New
            12
            Quote: Kars
            It does NOT look like Thailand needs 50 tanks right tomorrow.

            With such a pace of production, by the time they receive the latter, the first few will be repaired. How much is the resource there to capital? 500 hours?
            And who sent Thai armored personnel carriers to the ATO?
            It’s not the case, squeezing out five tanks a year like from a pipirka. So, for any customer, no patience is enough.
            And others will look at this pornography and say: "Well, nafig it!".
            1. Kars
              Kars 29 December 2015 14: 09 New
              +1
              Quote: GRAY
              With such a pace of production, by the time they get the last - the first few repairs will go through

              Well, why exaggerate so - I think the maximum is still 2 of the year.
              Quote: GRAY
              It’s not the case, squeezing out five tanks a year like from a pipirka.

              Hindus Arjun do even longer. Well and of course there is force majeure in the form of well-known events. And according to reputable sites, the Oplot contract was terminated in 2012 after a flood in Thailand. Instead, they bought floating PTS-4 from UVZ (or whatever) )
              It is also unknown how the payment is in the contract - it does not seem that the Thais paid all the money, otherwise they would have already sued.
              1. GRAY
                GRAY 29 December 2015 14: 44 New
                +5
                Quote: Kars
                Hindus Arjun do even longer.

                According to Wikipedia:
                India - 124 "Arjun of the 2st series" (2011 tank regiments), as of 2. [124] The first batch of these tanks in the amount of 2000 units was ordered in 7. [2010] In mid-May 124, the Indian Army placed a second order for 15 more Arjun Mk.I [250]. It is also planned to produce at least 8 “Arjun II series” [XNUMX].

                Figase "longer", it turns out that they, in the worst case, produced at least 12 tanks a year.
                -it does not seem that the Thais paid all the money, otherwise they would have already sued.

                The prepayment, most likely, was floated and not at all the modernization of the plant’s capacities was spent. Hence, cold shops, and low production rates, and payment upon delivery.
                1. Kars
                  Kars 29 December 2015 14: 49 New
                  +1
                  Quote: GRAY
                  Figase "longer", it turns out that they, in the worst case, produced at least 12 tanks a year.

                  add development time. You can’t even add, but simply take into account the military budget of India and what it is for yourself.
                  Quote: GRAY
                  The prepayment, most likely, was floated and not at all the modernization of the plant’s capacities was spent

                  what was it, but how much? And the plant’s modernization is not particularly necessary. How was it designed for 800 tanks a year under the USSR? There are several other problems.
                  1. GRAY
                    GRAY 29 December 2015 15: 04 New
                    +8
                    Quote: Kars
                    add development timelines.

                    What for? The Thais did not conclude a contract at the stage of the preliminary design.
                    The Vienna budget of Ukraine, too, seems to be out of business - another country pays money.
                    Quote: Kars
                    And modernization of the plant is not particularly necessary.


                    Well, the factory management obviously thinks the same.
                    1. Kars
                      Kars 29 December 2015 15: 15 New
                      +1
                      Quote: GRAY
                      What for? The Thais did not conclude a contract at the stage of the preliminary design.

                      Thais vykaty 51 change in design when signing a contract. But then to Arjun who for himself.
                      Quote: GRAY
                      Well, the factory management obviously thinks the same.

                      It was lucky that they did not saw it at all, or how the English tank in Leeds was closed.
                      Started to bring profits is another matter.
              2. Amnestied
                Amnestied 29 December 2015 15: 14 New
                +9
                In principle, the idea is wow: to gash on the chassis of the "Oplot" (T-64) b / h German artillery PzH 2000
                It would not hurt the author to know that the chassis of the Oplot tank is the T80 chassis, not the T64.
              3. Jackking
                Jackking 31 December 2015 14: 11 New
                +2
                "Hindus Arjun make even longer" - this is the topic! Bravo! After all the legacy and possession of advanced technologies - to be equal with India ... Well done! Keep it up! If anything, the Germans will sell you something last year - but not on credit laughing
            2. andrewkor
              andrewkor 29 December 2015 17: 42 New
              +4
              BTR-4 with cracks in the armor was rejected by Iraq and did not accept 100 pieces from the second batch. Here they were pompously sent to the ATO
          2. Pilot
            Pilot 29 December 2015 14: 34 New
            10
            Quote: Kars
            It does NOT look like Thailand needs 50 tanks right tomorrow.

            Well, right kindergarten. Purely in Ukrainian, contracts, terms, quality - garbage. The main loot.
            1. Kars
              Kars 29 December 2015 14: 42 New
              +1
              Quote: Pilot
              Well, right kindergarten

              Can you tell the Hindus about the kindergarten with Takr Gorshkov? And how late and how much they pimped? Can Israel pay for air defense for the same pot?
              1. dvina71
                dvina71 29 December 2015 18: 32 New
                15
                Quote: Kars

                Can you tell the Indians about the kindergarten with TAKR Gorshkov?

                Hindus are in the know about the whole history of Vikramanditya. Initially, it was only planned to repair boilers, build up the take-off deck, and so on. But .. thanks to the fact that TAKR was made in the then Soviet Ukraine .., but it seems the word quality already then .. has sunk into oblivion. I had to change ALL internal communications .. The guys who worked there said something like this - they wouldn’t let us go to the checkpoint for such a quality of welding .. That’s how the Little Russians were welded there in due time.
                It’s easier to rebuild a ship than to cut and weld new pipes and tubes, which is exactly what you had to do. So the Indians know everything. Where the legs grow from and to whom they should be thankful for the increased price of the contract.
                I am writing this to you from Severodvinsk. So I know what.
                1. Amnestied
                  Amnestied 29 December 2015 20: 10 New
                  -3
                  Quote: dvina71
                  . But .. thanks to the fact that TAKR was made in the then Soviet Ukraine .., but it seems the word quality already then .. has sunk into oblivion

                  Do you doubt the quality of the Soviet defense industry?
                  1. Amnestied
                    Amnestied 30 December 2015 10: 09 New
                    -1
                    For minusers!
                    Do you really doubt the quality of the Soviet defense industry, or is it just that everything about Ukraine is only negative? Maybe it's time to separate flies from cutlets?
                    1. alex86
                      alex86 11 January 2016 21: 29 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Amnestied
                      is it just that everything about Ukraine is only in the negative?

                      Yes, here everything about Ukraine is only in the negative. request And about Russia only in the positive request "Such a shitty summer ..."
              2. ultra
                ultra 29 December 2015 22: 05 New
                +1
                Quote: Kars
                Can you tell the Indians about the kindergarten with TAKR Gorshkov?

                Well, the modernization of the TAKR is still not a serial production of the tank. Although it must be admitted, the Hindus have been pretty good.
                1. cheguevarazhiv
                  cheguevarazhiv 28 January 2016 13: 09 New
                  0
                  And do not forget that TAKR is a unique piece product and it is incorrect to compare it with the release of the upgraded serial t-80
          3. self-propelled
            self-propelled 29 December 2015 17: 03 New
            +1
            Quote: Kars
            We’ll be waiting for Thailand’s official statements. But there’ll be a gap. Meaning? It does NOT seem like Thailand needs 50 tanks tomorrow

            the problem is not that the T-84 is a bad tank (not many "tank powers" will be able to create such a tank). the problem is that the money allocated for the construction of tanks is simply spioneer. and now you need to seek out finances in order to fulfill the contract ... this is the "brake"
            1. Kars
              Kars 29 December 2015 17: 07 New
              +1
              Quote: self-propelled
              tank powers "will be able to create such a tank). The problem is that the money allocated for the construction of tanks was simply spioneer. And now you need to find finances in order to fulfill the contract ... this is the" brake "

              Then the Thais would have already filed a lawsuit. Although you may have access to financial documentation, and translations.
        2. Val_y
          Val_y 29 December 2015 18: 39 New
          +4
          So the whole point is that the specialists were slowly ticking away, those who did not have time to take them to the atom, from that with a simpler "watch" of them. I can’t get any quantity or quality, but with more complex systems, and even more so, so. .. glory of the Ukrainians fucking jump, a different type of leadership, hi nothing personal, just dough wants very much wink strong. They are already firing their ukraine, and therefore they start to whistle like "development with Fritz", "Nata standards", and this is just "give money" ... laughing
      2. loft79
        loft79 29 December 2015 11: 31 New
        14
        Greetings to Kars.
        Quote: Kars
        Clear business Ukroboron prom it is necessary to groan

        Not, not to cry, but will be surprised at the statements and real cases of Ukroboronprom. The same A. Tarasenko speaks rather critically about this institution. Here are the questions: will they buy only a 155-mm howitzer or the entire tower? It contains the whole "German" trick: ASUO, automatic loader, etc. Or they will develop it themselves. The price of all this? If memory serves the Armed Forces of Ukraine, it costs 1 Bastion. The fantasies of Ukroboronprom and reality are still parallel. Dozor-B recall.
        1. Kars
          Kars 29 December 2015 11: 42 New
          +1
          Quote: loft79
          The same A. Tarasenko speaks rather critically about this institution.

          It is more about the change of directors that come constantly from the conjunction of political clashes.
          Quote: loft79
          Here are the questions: will they buy only the 155-mm howitzer or the entire tower?

          The main question is where will the money come from?



          At the end of December 2015, representatives of the Ukroboronprom Group of Companies announced their intention to begin work on creating an 155-mm self-propelled artillery installation on the basis of the Oplot tank. It is supposed to involve HCBM and the Polish company Huta Stalowa Wola SA to participate in the project
          Such a small note caused such a strange article. Well, professional, and so with ridiculous arguments.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. PSih2097
            PSih2097 29 December 2015 11: 56 New
            +1
            Quote: Kars
            The main question is where will the money come from?

            Well, it’s well known that they will beg the IMF, however, how much of these loans will remain for the purchase and design of self-propelled guns, this is in question ...
          3. loft79
            loft79 29 December 2015 12: 10 New
            +6
            Quote: Kars
            The main question is where will the money come from?

            Yes, the question is price. Opportunity chassis Stronghold can. Next is the tower. If you buy, we will take conditionally the cost of the tower 50% of the cost of self-propelled guns, the "friendly" price for Lithuania is about 15 million euros. Those. The tower is conditionally 7,5 million euros. The export price of the Oplot tank is $ 4,9 million; it is cheaper for the APU. It turns out a gold self-propelled guns, Oplot can not afford it, but here self-propelled guns for hz how much money. If you develop everything yourself, then the big question is what happens and when. So it turns out "fantasy and reality."
            1. Kars
              Kars 29 December 2015 12: 44 New
              +2
              Quote: loft79
              The export price of the Oplot tank is $ 4,9 million, for AFU it is cheaper.

              So this vet with a tower-chassis is not expensive.
              Quote: loft79
              and here the self-propelled guns for hz how much money.

              Offhand somewhere 8 millions.
              And why take Paz2000 when you can take Donar?

              In principle, I do not see any reason to use the Oplot base. So, in the end, it looks like an ordinary fairy tale. But with this, you don’t need to write articles that nothing can work out.
          4. Pilat2009
            Pilat2009 29 December 2015 16: 45 New
            +3
            Quote: Kars
            The main question is where will the money come from?

            With this just print-clear. By the way, have you bought dollars for a long time? Sell?
            1. Kars
              Kars 29 December 2015 17: 08 New
              +1
              Quote: Pilat2009
              With this just print-clear. By the way, have you bought dollars for a long time? Sell?

              I bought for a long time. But they sell, and exchange.
          5. ultra
            ultra 29 December 2015 22: 10 New
            +1
            Quote: Kars
            The main question is where will the money come from?

            This is not just the main, but the critically important question. I’ll think it’s not going to go beyond building a couple of prototypes (at best).
      3. GRAY
        GRAY 29 December 2015 13: 50 New
        +1
        Quote: Kars
        And what are the problems with the terms of the development of the Bastion and Bulat?

        Problems with the timing of production :-)
        Quote: Kars
        come on only money.

        That's it. This, in general, is the key point.
        1. Kars
          Kars 29 December 2015 13: 59 New
          +2
          Quote: GRAY
          Problems with the timing of production :-)

          Development and manufacturing are two different things. There are no problems with manufacturing (upgrading T-64 to) Bulat.
          Quote: GRAY
          That's it. This, in general, is the key point.

          Well, even the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation required UVZ to cut crucian carp at the cost of manufacturing Almaty.
      4. Pilot
        Pilot 29 December 2015 14: 25 New
        +4
        Quote: Kars
        And what are the problems with the timing? here the Germans may well sell Donnar.

        So I think. But it’s better to give Ukrainians. After all, they won’t be able to buy, and even concepts don’t allow you to buy, and for free and sweet vinegar. But what about the lights? how many of them were and still will be with the Khokhloband ... Then you yourself know.
      5. Juborg
        Juborg 29 December 2015 15: 10 New
        +8
        Respected Karsyou have too much if. Main if, this is the desire to sell you something. The second and most important thing I think ifthis is a disbursement. Here it is if divided again into two if, this if will be a small series and if there will be a series. If and what will the Khanty-Mansiysk Plant take in general or any other production, under the conditions of a budget deficit and huge external debt that the default country cannot pay not only to Russia, but to other creditors, mainly the United States (which, incidentally, drove the Vilna Krajina into the debt hole, and your miracle oligarchs gobble up the last of the Soviet legacy) Jump and continue respected and take the throats of who are louder, this country will not be better.
        1. Kars
          Kars 29 December 2015 15: 37 New
          +1
          Quote: juborg
          The main thing is, is the desire to sell you something

          do you think it’s not?
          Quote: juborg
          The second and most important thing I think if is the allocation of funds.

          this is already a question clearly not for me or Ukroboronexport.
          Quote: juborg
          If it is something that HTZ or other production will pull at all, given the budget deficit and huge external debt that the default country cannot pay not only to Russia, but to other creditors

          Other creditors have been restructured, and the United States continues to provide guarantees.
          Quote: juborg
          Jump further dear and tear the throats of who are louder, this country will not be better.

          but the jumps are no longer for me at all, and the topic has nothing to do with it either.
          1. Captain nemo
            Captain nemo 29 December 2015 17: 15 New
            +3
            Quote: Kars
            Other creditors have been restructured, and the United States continues to provide guarantees.

            It’s easy to go, for those who have restructured the debts of Ukraine, the United States gives guarantees. And for those who have not restructured Ukraine’s debts, such as Russia, the US does not give a guarantee.
            And what then is the attractiveness of Ukraine for creditors, in debt restructuring, under the guarantee of the United States or what?
            1. Kars
              Kars 29 December 2015 17: 23 New
              +1
              Quote: Captain Nemo
              And what then is the attractiveness of Ukraine for creditors, in debt restructuring, under the guarantee of the United States or what?

              it’s not a question for me. If we wanted to get my loans back, I had to support Yanukovych and not return the Crimea. But it’s obvious to someone that Crimea is more important than loans and getting a hostile state close by.
              1. Captain nemo
                Captain nemo 29 December 2015 18: 20 New
                +5
                Quote: Kars
                We would like to repay our loans, it was necessary to support Yanukovych,

                Well, this is for you 3 billion, a fortune, for us it is not very.
                We supported Yanukovych by giving him and his Ukraine 3 lard, but the guarantors of the agreement of February 21, 2014 such as France, Poland, Germany did not support him, but we, unlike them, did not sign that agreement.
                Quote: Kars
                .But it is clear to someone that Crimea is more important than loans and receiving a hostile state at hand.

                Well, you say, too - if the territory could be traded, then Crimea is much more expensive and 30 billion, so here we have not lost anything. And the "friendly" states, the Yanukovychs, with the help of audio cuts on iPhone A, Yatsenyuk, will not be removed from their posts, and note that all this happened before the "removal" of the "Originally Ukrainian" Crimea by an evil aggressor neighbor.
              2. The comment was deleted.
              3. padded jacket
                padded jacket 29 December 2015 18: 36 New
                +5
                Quote: Kars
                .Would they want to return their loans, it was necessary to support Yanukovych, and not return the Crimea

                Well, why is the exchange of Crimea for former Russian money quite acceptable. The population of Crimea is more than two million people, mostly Russians, who are loyal to our country and to our people, mostly Russian, plus the peninsula with cities, houses, roads, fields, airfields, factories, military facilities, costs much more than all the loans Russia gave Ukraine, again we got a good resort for the rest of the entire population of our vast country with beaches, sanatoriums, and so on and of course the "unsinkable aircraft carrier" in the Black Sea.
                Quote: Kars
                and getting near a hostile state.

                It’s too hostile, it’s said too much; there are still ten or fifteen million Russians left, plus a “certain” number of Ukrainians speaking for Russia, and don’t forget about Donbass, this is a ready-made “bridgehead” and the army will, without any doubt, simply sweep away the Armed Forces of Ukraine (of course, with casualties) that she had already proved under Debaltseve.
                1. Kars
                  Kars 29 December 2015 19: 01 New
                  +1
                  Quote: quilted jacket
                  Well, why is the exchange of Crimea for former Russian money quite acceptable.

                  Then what are you worried about? Especially for you, these are trifles
                  Quote: Captain Nemo
                  Well, this is for you 3 billion, a fortune, for us it is not very.

                  Quote: quilted jacket
                  It’s too hostile it is said too much; there are still ten to fifteen million Russians left, plus a “certain” number of Ukrainians speaking for Russia

                  Prapoganda does not stand still, and works to the fullest. So everything is still ahead.
                  Quote: quilted jacket
                  Don’t forget about Donbass. This is a ready-made "bridgehead" and its army.

                  His ..army ... without the north wind would have been dared even last summer. But what can I tell you better.
                  1. padded jacket
                    padded jacket 29 December 2015 19: 33 New
                    +3
                    Quote: Kars
                    Then what are you worried about? Especially for you, these are trifles

                    Yes, this is a matter of principle, so to speak. Give it away very well; do not give it away; you may very soon "lose" Donetsk and Lugansk region fellow
                    Quote: Kars
                    His ..army ... without the north wind would have been dared even last summer.

                    Don’t pull faster as a resident of Ukraine. Show us all this “magical” and mysterious “North wind”, otherwise there’s a lot of talk about him, but no one has ever seen him.
                    1. Kars
                      Kars 29 December 2015 19: 49 New
                      +1
                      Quote: quilted jacket
                      e give it back, you can soon "lose" Donetsk and Lugansk region

                      rather, they would have already decided something about this. there people are dying.
                      Quote: quilted jacket
                      Don’t pull as a resident of Ukraine. Show us all finally this “magical” and mysterious “North wind”.

                      Well, why get pissed))) http://lostarmour.info/offtopic/
                      ask here)) they will show you.
                      1. padded jacket
                        padded jacket 29 December 2015 20: 19 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Kars
                        rather, they would have already decided something about this. there people are dying.

                        It’s a little incorrect to say more precisely that Ukrainian servicemen will kill them.
                        Quote: Kars
                        Well, why get pissed))) http://lostarmour.info/offtopic/
                        ask here)) they will show you.

                        Yes, no need. Kars. I know this site from time to time after the Slavic outcome of the loss I saw there.
                        Nothing special there; individual armored vehicles speculated from Russia evidence of "iron" dumb mass deliveries dumb smile
                        By the way, a good photo, if not a fake, of course, that there may well be a photo, for example, from Russia.
                        The new Urals BCH - I honestly saw something like that even in our army only once.
                      2. Kars
                        Kars 29 December 2015 20: 35 New
                        +1
                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        It’s a little incorrect to say more precisely that Ukrainian servicemen will kill them.

                        Like when the Donbass militia shoots die only .. Bandera ..
                        Yes, even if so)))
                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        Yes, no. Kars. I know this site.

                        Well, yes, you forgot, from the sect of denial T-72Б3
                        And Russian BTGs didn’t go near Ilovaisk. All were done by miners and steelmakers.
                      3. padded jacket
                        padded jacket 29 December 2015 20: 49 New
                        +4
                        Quote: Kars
                        when the Donbass militia shoots die only .. Bandera.

                        Here you are completely right so it is.
                        Quote: Kars
                        Well, yes, you forgot, from the sect of denial T-72Б3

                        Yes it's me.
                        Quote: Kars
                        And Russian BTGs didn’t go near Ilovaisk. All were done by miners and steelmakers.

                        Many of these steelworkers and miners also served in the army both in Soviet and Ukrainian, so there is nothing surprising here.
                        Again, I do not deny there were volunteers from Russia because we could not leave the people of Donbass who destroyed the Kiev regime.
                        Is that right?
                      4. Kars
                        Kars 29 December 2015 21: 59 New
                        +1
                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        Here you are completely right so it is.

                        Donbass residents will not agree with you))
                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        Again I do not deny there were volunteers from Russia

                        Well, a couple of three BTG, tornadoes and air defense.
                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        because we could not leave the people of Donbass who destroyed the Kiev regime.

                        and you left,))) two-thirds of the Donbass are so unique))
        2. Alf
          Alf 29 December 2015 19: 13 New
          +5
          Quote: Kars
          But it’s obvious to someone that Crimea is more important than loans and receiving a hostile state at hand.

          Some managers of a certain state openly said that in 2017, a NATO fleet will be stationed in Sevastopol (read, USA). Then Russia would have got even more enemy close by. And to consider Ukraine as a hostile state is, as it were softer to say, loudly said. And as a hostile and as a state.
          1. Kars
            Kars 29 December 2015 19: 25 New
            +1
            Quote: Alf
            Some managers of a certain state openly said that in the 2017 year a NATO fleet will be stationed in Sevastopol (read, USA).

            You have outdated data. In 2013, the rental of Sevastopol has been extended by 25 years.
            Quote: Alf
            And to consider Ukraine as a hostile state is, as it were softer to say, loudly said. Both as hostile and as a state

            Neglect is always expensive.
            1. Alf
              Alf 29 December 2015 19: 44 New
              +3
              Quote: Kars
              You have outdated data. In 2013, the rental of Sevastopol has been extended by 25 years.

              And what did the maydown authorities say?
              Quote: Kars
              Neglect is always expensive.

              Sorry if offended. But, let's face it, Ukraine is not an independent state now, and management is due to a large puddle. What decisions were made by the Ukrainian government without the approval of the US government?
              1. Kars
                Kars 29 December 2015 19: 51 New
                +1
                Quote: Alf
                And what did the maydown authorities say?

                Support Putin Jankovic there would be no Maidan authorities.
                Quote: Alf
                Ukraine is not an independent state now, and management is due to a large puddle. What decisions were made by the Ukrainian government without the approval of the US government?

                And what the USA suddenly became a friend of the Russian Federation and will not make a decision?
                1. ultra
                  ultra 29 December 2015 22: 13 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Kars
                  Support Putin Jankovic there would be no Maidan authorities.

                  How so?
                2. Kars
                  Kars 29 December 2015 22: 23 New
                  +1
                  Quote: ultra
                  How so?

                  Yanukovych would still be president.
                3. Captain nemo
                  Captain nemo 30 December 2015 02: 33 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Kars
                  Yanukovych would still be president.

                  No, he would not be the president of Ukraine in 2015, because on February 21, 2014, he agreed in writing to the early presidential elections in the fall of 2014. But all the same, even taking into account the non-fulfillment of one of the parties undertaken on 21.02.2014, the term of his presidency has expired and his certificate of President of Ukraine is no longer valid.
                4. The comment was deleted.
            2. Pilat2009
              Pilat2009 30 December 2015 18: 50 New
              +1
              Quote: Kars
              If Putin had supported Yanukovych, there would have been no Maidan authorities.

              And what does Putin have to do with it?
              Yanukovych showed weakness and further loss of population many times exceeded possible losses when restoring order
            3. Kars
              Kars 30 December 2015 19: 39 New
              +1
              Quote: Pilat2009
              And what does Putin have to do with it?

              And who? Who pulled in the vehicle? Who gave a loan to catch up so that all the people on the road would see it as a bribe? Who, after 4 years, sharply reduced the price of gas?

              Quote: Pilat2009
              Yanukovych showed weakness

              Because no one blocked him in front of Europe and the United States. And it is not a fact that dispersing the Yanyk Maidan of the Russian Federation would not have joined the sanction against Yanukovych, and under the same reason of unrest and protection from the dictatorship of Yanukovych would not have protected the Crimea.
            4. cheguevarazhiv
              cheguevarazhiv 28 January 2016 13: 33 New
              0
              How do I like such stubborn natural ... that everyone should and everyone is to blame ... Russians rob the expensive gas, they don’t get cheap gas again ... They all pull the poor somewhere ... Yes, for everything that happens to you and it happened you answer YOURSELF And until this in your head clicks and you wail if ... yes if only ... All these waves of thieves came to power only with the help of you or indifferent consent again you, all this Nazi, Bandera ideology appeared in schools and schools with your disdainful consent (in the majority). So all these lamentations are at the d / s level. All can be said by Sergey Lavrov’s “cough”
  • A.Lex
    A.Lex 29 December 2015 15: 24 New
    +1
    Help Omerika? Oh well! laughing
    Everything that the gringes touch is falling apart (such is their nature - the destroyers of everything!). Optimist you my friend!
  • self-propelled
    self-propelled 29 December 2015 16: 52 New
    +1
    Quote: Kars
    Something article is some kind of strana. Obviously, Ukroboron prom needs to be cried out. But they couldn’t bring any arguments. The main problem is funding. Will it then Western companies will certainly help.

    I have already written about this, but I repeat - it’s such fun to find fault with everything “Khokhlyatskoe” ... sorting out the topic is not fate.
    -
    In principle, the idea is wow: to gash on the chassis of the "Oplot" (T-64) b / h German artillery PzH 2000

    so, briefly, but nothing that the Oplot is the T-84 (the redesigned chassis of the T-80, but nothing like the T-64 (its modernization is the “Bulat”)
    - on the basis of the Oplot there is an opportunity to create a chassis with a front driving sprocket (as a base for TBMP and self-propelled guns)
    By the way, the modern Coalition was created on the basis of the T-90 (but for some reason not the “Almaty”, although the TBMP T-15 chassis would be ideal (as for me) for the new self-propelled gun)

    (in the photo, what can be done on the basis of the Ukrainian T-84 with the re-arrangement of CO)
    it all comes down to financing (but this is a big problem in Ukraine)
    1. Captain nemo
      Captain nemo 29 December 2015 17: 23 New
      0
      Quote: self-propelled
      By the way, the modern Coalition was created on the basis of the T-90 (but for some reason not the “Almaty”, although the TBMP T-15 chassis would be ideal (as for me) for the new self-propelled gun)

      Here in the first video of the article it is shown that the crew of the "Kaolitsiya" is located at the front as in "Armata", when I would never have thought that it was a T-90 base. But I won’t argue because it’s not in the subject on which base “Kaolitsiya” was created, but it’s still amazing that it could be done if it was really as you said.
    2. Kars
      Kars 29 December 2015 17: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: self-propelled
      but for some reason it’s not “Almaty”, although the TBMP T-15 chassis would be ideal (as for me) for the new self-propelled gun)

      I’m honestly telling you - I don’t know what they said about Uplot base in Ukroboronprom. But this is a dead end for long-range self-propelled guns. Only a specialized chassis, albeit using components and assemblies of the tank.
    3. uwzek
      uwzek 29 December 2015 17: 36 New
      0
      Quote: self-propelled
      although the TBMP T-15 chassis would be ideal (

      And you can ask what kind of cars in the pictures? They have nothing to do with “armatures”.
      1. Kars
        Kars 29 December 2015 17: 39 New
        +2
        Quote: uwzek
        And you can ask what kind of cars in the pictures?

        Quote: self-propelled
        (in the photo, what can be done on the basis of the Ukrainian T-84 with the re-arrangement of CO
      2. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 29 December 2015 21: 35 New
        0
        "... In Ukroboronprom seriously believe that this will allow the Ukrainian army to gain an advantage during artillery duels in the war in the Donbass ...."

        Fools Dumka richer.
  • ratfly
    ratfly 30 December 2015 13: 53 New
    0
    It’s impossible to expect competent conclusions from the person who wrote “financial support”. IMHO.
  • Hubun
    Hubun 29 December 2015 07: 08 New
    +6
    Another campaign dummy
  • Vladimirets
    Vladimirets 29 December 2015 07: 14 New
    0
    You must first find the money to buy howitzers for the production of self-propelled guns. request
    1. Alf
      Alf 29 December 2015 19: 20 New
      0
      Quote: Vladimirets
      You must first find the money to buy howitzers for the production of self-propelled guns.

      Quote: Kars
      And here the Germans may well sell the art part of Donnar

      And who told you that the Germans will sell? If HZ makes an excellent self-propelled gun, then to hell with the Germans a competitor. I dare to recall that Europe needs Europe as a supplier of cheap labor and a huge consumer market, but not a competitor. If you sell your products to the Germans, then the classic question immediately arises: Where is the money, Zin?
      1. Kars
        Kars 29 December 2015 19: 23 New
        +3
        Quote: Alf
        And who told you that the Germans will sell? If HZ makes an excellent self-propelled gun, then to hell the Germans competitor

        And who said that the Germans would sell with the possibility of resale?
        Quote: Alf
        Europe needs Ukraine as a supplier of cheap labor and a huge consumer market, but not a competitor.

        Europe is already full of cheap power slave, it breaks down there itself. And European goods are too expensive for our market with low purchasing power. So, unfortunately, all the fuss over Ukraine would just create an instability zone on the border of the Russian Federation
        1. Alf
          Alf 29 December 2015 19: 46 New
          0
          Quote: Kars
          .And European goods are too expensive for our low purchasing power market.

          Then for what purpose does the EU require opening Ukraine for Euro goods from January 1 of 2016 of the year?
          And as for instability, this is, unfortunately, true.
          1. Kars
            Kars 29 December 2015 19: 52 New
            +1
            Quote: Alf
            Then for what purpose does the EU require opening Ukraine for Euro goods from January 1 of 2016 of the year?

            she does not require.
  • tchoni
    tchoni 29 December 2015 07: 24 New
    +4
    They need to do something ... Here they are doing ... Something ... As I have repeatedly said: the devastation in the country creates a lot of "geniuses". And they begin to heal people with urine ... That "craams and ointments" lead to normal battle .... And there are such "projects" (not the first (remember the "urban combat vehicle" from the basics) and not the last) Particularly curious : why not buy ready-made self-propelled guns right away? After all, as I understand it, the main cymes (as well as the cost of the device in the warhead ... How much will save the stronghold chassis and how much they will spend on development? With a playable order of 50 pieces ... I'm afraid this will not be cost-effective ... So that ? Ukrobronprom warms the soul with hope for an external order?
  • APASUS
    APASUS 29 December 2015 07: 44 New
    +2
    Since the time of the Pakistan contract, Ukraine has not produced its gun barrels. Switching to a different caliber will only hook the country into import.
  • inkass_98
    inkass_98 29 December 2015 07: 57 New
    +9
    Thailand, it seems like the whole 10 "Bastions" were put in two stages, five at a time. But not the point. "What is the main thing in the tank? The main thing in the tank is not to keep your eyes open!" (FROM). Have you already learned how to make your own trunks? Or how? As far as I understand - or how. Mriies are such mri ...
    And about the ruin tanks: who does not know the strongest tank in the world, that is a sucker. It has long been proven ukroSMI:
    1. torp
      torp 29 December 2015 10: 26 New
      +7
      These black-and-white fools with TSN, which heresy they can’t come up with, to cheer up the Ukrainians! These strongholds are burning for a sweet soul, I saw it myself!
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 29 December 2015 08: 33 New
    +2
    What do you dislike about the rear-engine layout? At the MSTA and the Coalition, where is the motor ..? From behind! And the return on the tank gun is greater than the 155mm howitzer. And the rest I agree.
  • Polkovodetz
    Polkovodetz 29 December 2015 08: 33 New
    +4
    Well, well, citizens of the Ukrop defense industry, well.
    The development of a combat vehicle, with sufficient funding and the availability of a scientific and technical base, will take five to seven years and another two years will be spent on testing and eliminating the identified shortcomings.
    2022-2023 years? Wait and see.
  • Belousov
    Belousov 29 December 2015 08: 33 New
    +2
    Again permogue. Well, in general, everything is as usual, they will put the next armored Pskov-Buryat paratroopers division of the GRU of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces / FSB / SVR / Ministry of Agriculture / RUSNANO (underline as necessary).
  • Hammer
    Hammer 29 December 2015 09: 01 New
    +2
    1. Oplot based on the T-80.
    2. Thailand delivered 10 cars.
    3. What is the "T-90S1 and Type 95"?
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 29 December 2015 12: 09 New
      +7
      Quote: Hammer
      What is the "T-90S1 and Type 95"?

      T-90S1 - export version of T-90

      Type 95 (there is a machine gun and air defense missile systems also known as PGZ-95) (likely typo - Type 96) - the main battle tank, which is in service with the People's Liberation Army of China.

      And the Type 95 is a Japanese heavy turret tank of the 1930s. Although maybe Thailand wants this particular tank ... laughing
      1. Hammer
        Hammer 31 December 2015 09: 51 New
        0
        yeah, and photo B3 with the moon laughing
        I have not met the designation anywhereС1. There is T-90SThere T-90CAThere T-90SK, T-90S1 no. So the question remains open
  • Pbs
    Pbs 29 December 2015 09: 20 New
    -16
    The author of the article was overexcited even more than Svidomo dill. Meanwhile:
    1) There were almost no stocks of Soviet shells there, now they are firing expired. They traded them for twenty-five years. And there is no own production either. So this whole epic is just to solve the problem of the supply of ammunition.
    2) The mention of the Minsk agreements clearly gives witness to the sect of the Cunning Plan.
    3) An interesting question is why the author mentioned the Coalition. After all, the Minsk agreements? Are Ukrainian fascists our dear partners? Nobody promised anything to Donbass and our troops are not there? So, we can only wipe ourselves with our Coalition. Moreover, “On the whole, the new Coalition’s self-propelled artillery installations will significantly increase the combat capabilities of the Russian Armed Forces, but the fate of these self-propelled guns has not yet been fully determined. The Ministry of Defense has recently begun to reduce the volume of purchases of new weapons and military equipment. the reduction has already hit the promising T-50 fighters and the main T-14 battle tanks. " So whether there is a Coalition or not is still being decided. While she is gone.
    1. Forest
      Forest 29 December 2015 10: 05 New
      0
      1) There are still plenty of shells there, if you believe all sources, then they already shot down all the planes, and the tanks are coming to an end, and there is no ammunition for the MLRS.
      2) I’ll be quiet.
      3) If we do not rush to fight with Ukraine and get involved in an endless war, which needs to send a couple of hundred thousand people, this does not mean that we do not need new artillery. They cut their purchases of the FIRST batch, you need to learn at least the whole news to read in the source, and to believe all siPovskih tantrums from the “Summary of the militia of New Russia”.
      1. would
        would 29 December 2015 12: 42 New
        +3
        fight with Ukraine and get involved in an endless war, to which you need to send a couple of hundred thousand people


        An endless war with Ukraine, which must send hundreds of thousands of people, oh comedian laughing
        1. Forest
          Forest 29 December 2015 17: 09 New
          +1
          And what are you going to control the territory? A pair of armored personnel carriers and a company of riot police? 200-250 thousand is a very suitable occupation contingent for such a country, although it may also be insufficient. Already threw Japanese caps in 1904-1905 years.
          1. would
            would 29 December 2015 17: 20 New
            +1
            The "army" existing there. Yes. As she first came under the putschists so after and will go under the militias. And there will be no occupation, Russia does not need this.

            Before this, by the way, you can completely defeat the ridiculous Ukrainian group that the militia almost broke, but the Minsk conspiracy broke out.
            1. Forest
              Forest 29 December 2015 19: 53 New
              +1
              Forgot Afghan? There, at first, it began to calm down, and then, as they say, the heat began. Until August, in the Donbass, healthy men ached, they say help Russia, ahead of their wives and children dumped us. And to say that the BCH completely defeated the faction of the APU in the summer of the 2014 and in the winter of the 2015, the language will not turn. In the south from Granite to Mariupol, a thin layer was spread of a whole rifle company on jihad mobiles. This was such a force that the Ukrainian battalions did not meet anyone and stood along Kalmius. In winter, the militia threw its last reserves, and if it were not for the Armed Forces command, which valiantly swelled and steal everything and everything in the rear, then two brigades and a pair of BTGs could break through the encirclement of a Debaltsevo group sitting like a herd of rabbits and even advance further towards Gorlovka.
              Enough obscene, but you should read http://ari.ru/comments/20150326/kak-brali-debalcevo
              1. would
                would 29 December 2015 21: 32 New
                -1
                Ukraine is neither Afghanistan nor close nor far, so the comparison is clearly incorrect.

                And to say that the BCH completely broke the faction of the APU in the summer of 2014 and in the winter of 2015 - the language will not turn


                Debaltsevsky boiler does not agree, everything was clearly shown there. Regarding the "last reserves", everything was also sorted out and it turned out that they were far from the last. Just clearly not enough and not enough "humanitarian assistance" about which the article is narrating.
        2. uwzek
          uwzek 29 December 2015 17: 49 New
          +2
          Quote: rait
          An endless war with Ukraine, which must send hundreds of thousands of people, oh comedian

          Comedian only in terms of the fact that too few people are appointed. To capture Lviv or Ivano-Frankivsk, of course, so many fighters will not be needed, but to keep the occupying army, to pacify Bandera, I am already silent about how to feed (again) this state. There may not be enough of the entire population of the planet ...
          1. would
            would 29 December 2015 19: 06 New
            -1
            But no occupying army is needed because there are APUs and police, Bandera in the worst case, a couple percent of the population.

            Even after the coup, measures could be taken that would eventually lead to the restoration of power in Ukraine by relatively bloodless methods, but this idea apparently did not find support from the Russian authorities.
            1. Kars
              Kars 29 December 2015 19: 07 New
              +1
              Quote: rait
              but this idea apparently did not find support from the Russian authorities

              Crimea turned out to be more expensive.
              1. would
                would 29 December 2015 19: 12 New
                0
                So Crimea could be left to itself laughing
    2. johnny
      johnny 29 December 2015 12: 43 New
      +1
      Quote: Pbs
      The author of the article was overexcited even more than Svidomo dill. Meanwhile:
      1) There were almost no stocks of Soviet shells there, now they are firing expired. They traded them for twenty-five years. And there is no own production either. So this whole epic is just to solve the problem of the supply of ammunition.
      2) The mention of the Minsk agreements clearly gives witness to the sect of the Cunning Plan.
      3) An interesting question is why the author mentioned the Coalition. After all, the Minsk agreements? Are Ukrainian fascists our dear partners? Nobody promised anything to Donbass and our troops are not there? So, we can only wipe ourselves with our Coalition. Moreover, “On the whole, the new Coalition’s self-propelled artillery installations will significantly increase the combat capabilities of the Russian Armed Forces, but the fate of these self-propelled guns has not yet been fully determined. The Ministry of Defense has recently begun to reduce the volume of purchases of new weapons and military equipment. the reduction has already hit the promising T-50 fighters and the main T-14 battle tanks. " So whether there is a Coalition or not is still being decided. While she is gone.

      What does it mean that they have already come under reduction if they have not yet been taken into service? they have already invested a lot of money and money in these projects, it is unlikely that they will simply be stopped just like that. The only question is time and additional funds ...
    3. cheguevarazhiv
      cheguevarazhiv 28 January 2016 13: 44 New
      0
      It would be nice to refer to an official document on the reduction of purchases of modern weapons in Russia ... Otherwise, you become like the Ukrainian media
  • the47th
    the47th 29 December 2015 09: 40 New
    +8
    Stupidly buying PzH-2000 from the Germans will be cheaper than making Frankenstein with the help of Ukrainian parts.
    1. zekaze1980
      zekaze1980 29 December 2015 10: 08 New
      +2
      And so it will be, with the subsequent shutdown of the tank factory.
    2. Pilat2009
      Pilat2009 29 December 2015 16: 49 New
      0
      Quote: the47th
      It’s stupid to buy PzH-2000 from the Germans cheaper

      And will German engineers serve them?
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 29 December 2015 21: 22 New
        +2
        Quote: Pilat2009
        Quote: the47th
        It’s stupid to buy PzH-2000 from the Germans cheaper

        And will German engineers serve them?

        And with the Ukrainian chassis: Ukrainian engineers (chassis) + German engineers (tower with a gun and ammunition) -?
  • Termit1309
    Termit1309 29 December 2015 11: 24 New
    +6
    Damn, how much can you? And how does this article differ from the articles on the censor?
    As far as I know, Ukraine does not produce 152-155 caliber barrels. If they want to stir up a new self-propelled gun, they will have to buy trunks on the side. It would be foolish to think that they will buy them in Russia.
    The fact that on the basis of a tank chassis it is impossible to create self-propelled guns is also stupid, they have created more than once.
    If you buy trunks in Germany, it’s really easier to buy ammunition than to develop it yourself.
    The only thing to laugh at is the question of financing and the ability of the plant to build them.
    And the article is really dumb. am
    1. Petrik66
      Petrik66 29 December 2015 11: 38 New
      +1
      it’s easier to buy used from NATO and not bother.
    2. johnny
      johnny 29 December 2015 12: 50 New
      0
      The article is really dumb to become after reading this ...
      "In principle, the idea is wow: to gash on the chassis" Oplot "(T-64) b / h German artillery PzH 2000. In principle, the parameters of the cases are the same in length and width, 7075/3400 for Oplot and 7870/3480 for German howitzer. "

      Gash it ... ha ha, okay next. The bulwark is not the T-64 time to remember. Well, about the almost coincidence of sizes, especially in length. A meter more, a meter less)))
    3. kotvov
      kotvov 29 December 2015 12: 59 New
      +1
      If you buy barrels in Germany, then it’s really easier to buy ammunition than to develop yourself, say you bought the barrels, and what to look at? Besides the barrels, the self-propelled guns still have a lot to do.
      we need to buy money, to produce money, specialists are needed.
  • samoletil18
    samoletil18 29 December 2015 11: 50 New
    0
    First, a piece, and then the whole armament will be purchased. European integration.
    1. padded jacket
      padded jacket 29 December 2015 13: 02 New
      +3
      This self-propelled gun looks a lot like the Iranian self-propelled gun Raad-2 with a 155-mm gun entered service in 2000 and created on the basis of the T-72 tank.
      1. Kars
        Kars 29 December 2015 13: 22 New
        +5
        The title photo is actually the Crab with the English art part.
        And for a long time nothing new baud the moon.
        1. padded jacket
          padded jacket 29 December 2015 13: 46 New
          +1
          Quote: Kars
          And for a long time nothing new baud the moon.

          And is that a hybrid of the “Frenchman” with the T-72?
          -------------------------------------------------- ------
          And by the new Ukrainian self-propelled guns based on the tank, do you mean this miracle of Ukrainian technical genius? smile

          So it is only in the project and it is unlikely when it will be realized.
          1. Kars
            Kars 29 December 2015 14: 01 New
            +2
            Quote: quilted jacket
            And by the new Ukrainian self-propelled guns based on the tank, do you mean this miracle of Ukrainian technical genius?

            I don't mean anything yet.
        2. padded jacket
          padded jacket 29 December 2015 14: 11 New
          0
          Quote: Kars
          The title photo is actually the Crab with the English art part.

          I do not mean self-propelled guns in the picture; I mean self-propelled guns based on a tank.
          Quote: Kars
          I don't mean anything yet.

          That's right, you don’t need to do it anyway. This is a pipe dream of the Ukrainian military-industrial complex, the maximum that they will be capable of under the current leadership of the country are separate copies or an experienced batch, and even that is highly doubtful.
          1. Kars
            Kars 29 December 2015 14: 18 New
            +1
            Quote: quilted jacket
            I do not mean self-propelled guns in the picture; I mean self-propelled guns based on a tank.

            Then it’s not at all clear why the Iranian crafts should be remembered? The most ordinary Msta What’s not enough for you? About the same thing.
            Quote: quilted jacket
            That's right, you don’t need to do it anyway. This is a pipe dream of the Ukrainian military-industrial complex, what they will be capable of under the current leadership of the country

            It’s difficult to find out what it’s possible to know at the same time .. the present .. the leadership has nothing to do with individual copies or installation parties. Everyone from Yanukovych is still being weighed.
            1. padded jacket
              padded jacket 29 December 2015 14: 44 New
              +2
              Quote: Kars
              Then it’s not at all clear why to remember the Iranian crafts?

              Because, unlike our Msta (in which the chassis is practically preserved in its original form only lightly), Ukrainian military thought (judging by the photo) wants to "turn" the tank chassis so that the MTO is in front of it.
              Quote: Kars
              It’s difficult to know the maximum

              Well, it’s already quite possible to judge by the rate of release of the Oplot tank that the production of this self-propelled guns will be very miserable lol
              in the 2011 year, Ukraine signed a contract with Thailand for the supply of 49 Oplot tanks with a total value of about 250 million dollars. The first batch of 5 tanks was delivered at the end of the 2013 year. In June of this year, the concern completed the next delivery of a batch of 5 tanks to Thailand. Later, in June of this year, the management of Ukroboronprom dismissed the head of the plant to disrupt production plans. Malysheva - manufacturer of the Oplot tanks laughing
              http://www.unian.net/1201119-x.html
              1. Kars
                Kars 29 December 2015 14: 52 New
                +1
                Quote: quilted jacket
                Because unlike our Msta (

                from Soviet revenge.
                Quote: quilted jacket
                wants to "flip" the chassis of the tank so that the MTO is in front of it.

                and what? is this some sort of impossible trick?

                Quote: quilted jacket
                in the 2011 year, Ukraine signed a contract with Thailand for the supply of 49 Oplot tanks with a total value of about 250 million dollars. The first batch of 5 tanks was delivered at the end of the 2013 year. In June of this year, the concern completed the next delivery of a batch of 5 tanks to Thailand. Later, in June of this year, the management of Ukroboronprom dismissed the head of the plant to disrupt production plans. Malysheva - manufacturer of the Oplot tanks

                And what? Did you want to say something? Develop an idea. And the head of the plant named after Malyshev was removed not for this reason. But for failure to repair tanks for ATO and quality.
                1. Kars
                  Kars 29 December 2015 15: 13 New
                  +1
                  Quote: quilted jacket
                  in 2011, Ukraine signed a contract with Thailand for the supply of 49 Oplot tanks

                  By the way, keep in mind that at the time of the conclusion of the contract, Thailand made more than 50 changes to the tank design at the request of its military and the Malyshev factory completed them all and agreed with the customers, which is also the time.

                  And the number of tanks produced with at least 2009 would be cool for infographics. The 2009-0,2010-0,2011-0 would look better.
                  1. padded jacket
                    padded jacket 29 December 2015 15: 22 New
                    +2
                    Quote: Kars
                    at the time of the conclusion of the contract, Thailand put forward more than 50 changes in the design of the tank at the request of its military

                    So what? This is a common practice for export contracts, each customer tries to "adapt" the technique for themselves.
                    Quote: Kars
                    And the number of tanks produced with at least 2009 would be cool for infographics. The 2009-0,2010-0,2011-0 would look better.

                    If there is one, I personally don’t have one.
                2. padded jacket
                  padded jacket 29 December 2015 15: 19 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Kars
                  from Soviet revenge.

                  Well, I live in Russia, so Msta is ours smile
                  Quote: Kars
                  and what? is this some sort of impossible trick?

                  So that's why I brought the Iranian model with him and the tank chassis of the T-72 was turned upside down and the MTO was ahead.
                  Quote: Kars
                  And what? Did you want to say something? Develop a thought

                  Yes, I’ve developed this “thought” for a long time, you just don’t understand lol
                  Therefore, "chew" smile:
                  To release even the long-developed Oplot in acceptable quantities, the Ukrainian military-industrial complex is not in a position to speak of the release of new self-propelled guns; this is practically an impossible task for it.
                  1. Kars
                    Kars 29 December 2015 15: 41 New
                    +1
                    Quote: quilted jacket
                    So what? This is a common practice for export contracts, each customer tries to "adapt" the technique for themselves.

                    Practice is common, but the timing is strongly affected.
                    Quote: quilted jacket
                    If there is one, I personally don’t have one.

                    Naturally not, it wouldn’t be patriotic to say so.
                    Quote: quilted jacket
                    Well, I live in Russia, so Msta is ours

                    Soviet. Your Coalition.
                    Quote: quilted jacket
                    So that's why I brought the Iranian model with him and the tank chassis of the T-72 was turned upside down and the MTO was ahead.

                    Why? If you yourself understand that nothing special.
                    Quote: quilted jacket
                    To release even the long-developed Oplot in acceptable quantities, the Ukrainian military-industrial complex is not in a position to speak of the release of new self-propelled guns; this is practically an impossible task for it.

                    Discussion is not the right idea the issue of strongholds and new self-propelled guns are tasks of the same level. And depend only on financing.
                    1. padded jacket
                      padded jacket 29 December 2015 15: 56 New
                      +4
                      Quote: Kars
                      Practice is common, but the timing is strongly affected.

                      Most likely it is.
                      Quote: Kars
                      Naturally not, it wouldn’t be patriotic to say so.

                      Well, this is your business.
                      Quote: Kars
                      Soviet. Your Coalition.

                      Kars Russia has long ago declared itself the assignee of the USSR.
                      Why?
                      Yes, because simply none of the former republics wanted to take on its obligations and huge responsibility.
                      Therefore, MSTA is OUR smile
                      Quote: Kars
                      Why? If you yourself understand that nothing special.

                      Well then, give me more examples of how other countries created self-propelled guns based on an “inverted” tank chassis and how many such countries are there in the world? Then I will compare the Ukrainian self-propelled guns based on the tank which is not yet with these samples.
                      Quote: Kars
                      Discussion is not the right idea the issue of strongholds and new self-propelled guns are tasks of the same level. And depend only on financing.

                      Financing is only one of the conditions if as they say "no head" or "no hands" then no, let no huge cash infusion help.
                      1. Kars
                        Kars 29 December 2015 17: 18 New
                        +1
                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        Well then, give me more examples of how other countries created self-propelled guns based on an “inverted” tank chassis and how many such countries are there in the world?

                        What for?
                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        Then I will compare the Ukrainian self-propelled guns based on the tank which is not yet with these samples.

                        How can you compare something if you haven’t seen anything yet and don’t know about the line-up?
                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        Financing is only one of the conditions if as they say "no head" or "no hands" then no, let no huge cash infusion help.

                        In our case, there is only finance.
                      2. padded jacket
                        padded jacket 29 December 2015 18: 17 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Kars
                        How can you compare something if you haven’t seen anything yet and don’t know about the line-up?

                        Okay, I convinced the new Ukrainian self-propelled guns that this is just another bluff that exists only in the fantasies of some designers from the military-industrial complex and which is unlikely to be realized when.
                        Quote: Kars
                        In our case, there is only finance.

                        How do you know, or maybe you are one of her "designers"? lol
                      3. johnny
                        johnny 29 December 2015 19: 04 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Kars

                        In our case, there is only finance.

                        These are all excuses. UVZ also had no finances after the collapse of the USSR.
                        However, "In 1999, a preliminary contract was signed for the supply of three tanks for testing. In 2001, a final contract was signed and delivery of a batch of 310 T-90Ss began"
                        and the Indians demanded a lot of improvements ...
                      4. Kars
                        Kars 29 December 2015 19: 11 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Johnny
                        UVZ also had no finances after the collapse of the USSR.

                        We didn’t have so much finance. In T-90 so much money was swelled that Kharkov did not even dream about after the collapse of the USSR.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        However, "In 1999, a preliminary contract was signed for the supply of three tanks for testing. In 2001, a final contract was signed and delivery of a batch of 310 T-90С began

                        But Ukraine used to sell T-84 to Pakistan. And not to India, where the USSR closed it with tanks and a tank factory. But to a country where the USSR did not trade before. And the same thing started that now on the Oplot

                        The super contract for the supply of 320 T-84 tanks worth more than 600 million dollars, which Ukraine concluded with Pakistan last year, is most likely on the verge of collapse. According to the UAE's military and diplomatic circles, the Pakistani government allegedly intends to revise its financial obligations under the tank contract in connection with the violation by Kiev of its terms.
                      5. johnny
                        johnny 29 December 2015 19: 30 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Kars
                        in the T-90 so much money swelled that Kharkov did not even dream about after the collapse of the USSR.

                        But in Soviet times it was exactly the opposite.
                        And can you voice how much you swell in the T-90?

                        But Ukraine used to sell T-84 to Pakistan. And not to India, where the USSR closed it with tanks and a tank factory. But to a country where the USSR did not trade before.


                        Ukraine, through dumping, “sold” its tanks. And when the time came to deliver them really, then for some reason I could not do it. And what prevented you from selling the T-84 or T-64BM of India? maybe the Indians were more pragmatic than their Pakistani and Thai counterparts? Selling a tank is not just selling a samovar.


                        And the same thing began that now on the Bastion


                        Well, you answered everything yourself. And with self-propelled guns it will be the same, unless of course it will.
                        Neither Europe nor the United States needs your defense industry! Only Russia. And now, for which they fought for something and ran ...
                      6. Kars
                        Kars 29 December 2015 19: 39 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Johnny
                        But in Soviet times it was exactly the opposite.
                        And can you voice how much you swell in the T-90?

                        In vryatli, except Kharkov, money went to Leningrad, and Omsk and Tagil were not deprived.
                        And there is a lot, a lot of money for the T-90. Even though at least a couple of hundred cars were made for the Russian Defense Ministry before the Indian contract.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        Ukraine "dumped" its tanks through dumping

                        two million dollars for a Soviet tank is not dumping. Dumping is when Poland or Finland sold a million.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        And what prevented you from selling the T-84 or T-64BM of India?

                        Because they first sold to Pakistan, and only then the Indians started to bustle. Yes, in Avadi, the T-72 assembly plant and the Hindus already had about 2000, and T-90 is the same T-72
                        Quote: Johnny
                        Well, you answered everything yourself.

                        To which I replied, or is it you implying that despite the attacks on the Oplot, the contract will be fulfilled like the Pakistani despite statements by various Russian bloggers?
                      7. johnny
                        johnny 29 December 2015 20: 28 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Kars

                        In vryatli, except Kharkov, money went to Leningrad, and Omsk and Tagil were not deprived.

                        It is clear that all were not deprived. But the favorites were Kharkov with their t-64. This is later, when problems began, he had to remember the rest.

                        And there is a lot, a lot of money for the T-90.

                        how much is this?)


                        Even the fact that at least a couple of hundred cars were done for the Russian Defense Ministry before the Indian contract.

                        as if the T-90 for our army grew out of the Indian contract. And it was adopted much later than India. What are 100 cars? what are you talking about?
                        The developments were to improve the T-72B before the collapse of the USSR. Well, so they were in Kharkov T-84. The plant has not worked for 10 years ...


                        and the T-90 is the same T-72

                        then the stronghold is the same T-80 only with the engine from T-64))

                        To which I replied, or is it you implying that despite the attacks on the Oplot, the contract will be fulfilled like the Pakistani despite statements by various Russian bloggers?

                        most likely the opposite. but wait and see.
                      8. Kars
                        Kars 29 December 2015 20: 43 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Johnny
                        But in the favorites was Kharkov with their t-64

                        And then with T-80UD, which they planned to make a single tank of the USSR, while the UVZ riveted tens of thousands of T-72
                        Quote: Johnny
                        how much is this?)

                        This is not for me to ask. More than it would be required to put a diesel on the T-80U, but not Kharkov.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        as if the T-90 for our army grew out of the Indian contract

                        are you confused with dates? T-90 was adopted by 1992 and production was
                        Quote: Johnny
                        The developments were to improve the T-72B before the collapse of the USSR. Well, so they were in Kharkov T-84. 10 plant did not work for years.

                        Where have you read this?
                        Serial production of the tank began in the 1992 year. In 1992 — 1998 about 120 T-90 for the Russian Armed Forces [21] was released. In connection with a reduction in funding for the armed forces, tank production stopped and was resumed only in 2001 after signing the export contract with India from 18 on February 2001

                        Quote: Johnny
                        then the stronghold is the same T-80 only with the engine from T-64))

                        Imagine a T-80 of the first modifications was even with a tower from the T-64
                        Quote: Johnny
                        most likely the opposite. but wait and see.

                        Then what did you want to say when you said that I myself answered? I brought an excerpt from an article of Russian production where the Pakistani contract was buried)) I hope you know that despite the article it was completed?
                      9. johnny
                        johnny 29 December 2015 21: 45 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Kars

                        And then with T-80UD, which they planned to make a single tank of the USSR, while the UVZ riveted tens of thousands of T-72

                        Well, before the T-80UD, did the country need tanks for export or not? and then, as a consequence, it turned out that they were not bad in aggregate.


                        This is not for me to ask. More than it would be required to put a diesel on the T-80U, but not Kharkov.


                        Initially, the T-80 was initially better funded than the T-72 and had a more advanced SLA. And yet I can’t understand where you got such confidence from, what is more? and compared with what if there is nothing to compare with and nothing in fact. So empty are the words.



                        Where have you read this?


                        I meant T-90A
                        T-90 92 and T-90С and especially T-90А two big differences.


                        Imagine a T-80 of the first modifications was even with a tower from the T-64


                        imagine. you here did not open me America)

                        Then what did you want to say when you said that I myself answered? I brought an excerpt from an article of Russian production where the Pakistani contract was buried)) I hope you know that despite the article it was completed?

                        1997 article?
                        let's see what you can now.
                      10. Kars
                        Kars 29 December 2015 21: 57 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Johnny
                        Well, before T-80UD, did the country and for export need tanks or not? and then, as a consequence, it turned out not bad

                        Export? What else expotr? T-72 is a mobilization tank.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        Initially, the T-80 was initially better funded than the T-72 and had a more advanced SLA. And yet I can’t understand where you got such confidence from, what is more? and compared with what if there is nothing to compare with and nothing in fact. So empty are the words.

                        Initially, the T-80 is a better tank than the T-72. And as you wish. Empty words are not empty. But in fact, the tank building of the Russian Federation was stamped on 15 for years, ditched a lot of money and only in the 2006 T-90 could compare with the T-80
                        Quote: Johnny
                        I meant T-90A
                        T-90 92 and T-90С and especially T-90А two big differences.

                        And where does T-90A come about? Did he appear right away? So you showed your incompetence and poor knowledge of the topic
                        Quote: Johnny
                        imagine. you here did not open me America)

                        yes it doesn’t seem like you even use wikis badly
                        Quote: Johnny
                        have you already delivered all 320 tanks?

                        half)))))))
                      11. johnny
                        johnny 30 December 2015 09: 48 New
                        +3
                        Quote: Kars

                        Export? What else expotr? T-72 is a mobilization tank.


                        mobilization and as it turned out later the main and most successful. And about exports, take a look at your favorite Wikipedia and see how many states it consists of and was in service with and how many conflicts it participated in. Do not show your incompetence))

                        Initially, the T-80 is a better tank than the T-72. And as you wish. Empty words are not empty. But in fact, the tank building of the Russian Federation was stamped on 15 for years, ditched a lot of money and only in the 2006 T-90 could compare with the T-80

                        for some indicators it’s better, for some worse. There was a natural selection, so to speak. You can argue about the advantages and disadvantages endlessly.

                        And where does the T-90A come from? Did he appear right away?

                        No, at the beginning there was a T-64, and even earlier a wheel))

                        it’s just that without the Indian contract there wouldn’t be a T-90A and maybe even a Russian tank industry.


                        so you showed your incompetence and poor knowledge of the topic


                        Well, where am I going to you, I use Wikipedia poorly)

                        half)))))))

                        Well, when you do the second half and fulfill the Thai contract, then you can talk about something)
                      12. Kars
                        Kars 30 December 2015 09: 56 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Johnny
                        as it turned out later, the main and most successful

                        How did you find out? Can you give confirmation?

                        Quote: Johnny
                        And about exports, take a look at your favorite Wikipedia and see how many states it consists of and was in service with and how many conflicts it participated in. Do not show your incompetence))

                        T-55 defeats T-72 in this regard)))))) At the same time, the Soviet Union did not export the best weapons for export. And after the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, the owners of T-72 basically tried to sell them.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        for some indicators it’s better, for some worse.

                        Sound that in addition to fuel consumption, the T-72 is better than the T-80
                        Quote: Johnny
                        it’s just that without the Indian contract there wouldn’t be a T-90A and maybe even a Russian tank industry.

                        If a bunch of grandmas weren’t thrown into the T-90, but if they took up the place of improving the T-80, then we could have done without this drama)) and 15 years of stomping on the spot
                        Quote: Johnny
                        Well, where am I going to you, I use Wikipedia poorly)

                        it is right
                        Quote: Johnny
                        Well, when he does the second half

                        ))))))))))
                      13. johnny
                        johnny 30 December 2015 14: 09 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Kars

                        How did you find out? Can you give confirmation?


                        I didn’t find out, but the military themselves, who are fighting and serving on these tanks, unlike you.

                        T-55 in this regard beats T-72))))))

                        where does the T-55? You talked about T-72. What do you download as on the Maidan)

                        At the same time, the Soviet Union did not export its best weapons.

                        And now I’ll also tell you a secret. The same T-72B for our aircraft were better than for export.

                        And after the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, the owners of the T-72 basically tried to sell them.

                        Time goes by, technology is aging. What do you want them to serve forever with them? although some T-55 and T-62 are still in service, not to mention the T-72.


                        Sound that in addition to fuel consumption, the T-72 is better than the T-80


                        A loader with a horizontal arrangement of charges, a more practical and maintainable engine better tolerates heat and dust.
                        Although fuel consumption in combat conditions can be only one decisive factor.
                        Is this not enough for you?


                        If a bunch of grandmas weren’t thrown into the T-90, but if they took up the place of improving the T-80, then we could have done without this drama)) and 15 years of stomping on the spot

                        You are respected or did not live at that time or do not know much. I'll tell you a secret. At that time, the country broke up, there was no money for anything. Especially on T-80 fuel. I am not saying that he was bad. It’s just a matter of saving at least one tank and preserving its production. Three different tanks with different mat. part and various support could pull only the USSR.
                        But there was a lot of drama and no need to laugh at it.


                        it is right

                        ))))))))))


                        Listen, I don’t know much what’s going on with your Pakistani contract of the late 90s. Whether you completed it or not, I don’t know, I’ll honestly say. Well done did well, no, well done too)) but it was a long time ago in another country.
                        you'd better be worried about the Thai contract.
                      14. Kars
                        Kars 30 December 2015 14: 26 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Johnny
                        I didn’t find out, but the military themselves, who fight and serve on these tanks, unlike you

                        but I thought that due to the fact that it is cheaper))) under the same pretext T-90 was developed because of cheapness. Although it turned out as usual, the avaricious pays twice.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        where does the T-55? You talked about T-72. What do you download as on the Maidan)

                        We are talking about Soviet tanks and about expotra))) I will forgive you the Maidan, you are no different from them.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        And now I’ll also tell you a secret. The same T-72B for our aircraft were better than for export.

                        Well, the T-72B is still worse than the T-64BV and T-80U. As well as the fact that he was sent to the troops by the timing later.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        Time goes by, technology is aging. What do you want them to serve forever with them? although some T-55 and T-62 are still in service, not to mention the T-72

                        Are you trying to jump like a maydown))) where does aging come from? Poland, Finland and others like them sold the T-72 in the beginning of the 90's and cheaply.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        A charging machine with a horizontal charge arrangement, a more practical and maintainable engine that better transfers heat and dust

                        We can’t prove the automatic charging, but as for the engine, you give a narrow range of conditions. Then, as power, specific power, mobility, it is important in any terrain and weather conditions.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        At that time, the country broke up, there was no money for anything.

                        And there was money to cut the T-72 into the T-90, as well as to release new tanks 120. When sawed on metal T-80UD instead of just changing their engines.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        Listen, I don’t know much what’s going on with your Pakistan contract of the end of 90x.

                        Yes, well))) okay, I’ll say that it is fully completed, despite obstacles from the Russian Federation, the tanks are in operation and there are no negative reviews, except for the same pubesenok as I quoted.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        you'd better be worried about the Thai contract.

                        And what to worry about him? They will not do it. The fact that Oplot won the tender is enough for me.
                      15. johnny
                        johnny 30 December 2015 15: 07 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Kars

                        but I thought that due to the fact that it is cheaper))) under the same pretext T-90 was developed because of cheapness. Although it turned out as usual, the avaricious pays twice.

                        The price matters, not only for the tank itself but also for its maintenance, but as you wish. And in what we paid twice, tell me?


                        We are talking about Soviet tanks and expotra)))


                        uh) you said about T-72, "Export? What other expotre? T-72 is a mobilization tank."

                        I’ll forgive you for that, you are no different from them.

                        thanks of course) but how did you define that?))


                        Well, the T-72B is still worse than the T-64BV and T-80U. As well as the fact that he was sent to the troops by the timing later.


                        what's worse besides the SLA?
                        and later it went because the T-72 was funded according to the residual principle ...

                        Are you trying to jump like a maydown))) where does aging come from? Poland, Finland and others like them sold the T-72 in the beginning of the 90's and cheaply.


                        Given that if there is money for newer and better equipment, why not sell the old one. Is it logical? This is not to say that the T-72 is bad.


                        I can’t prove the automatic charging


                        In Chechnya, defeats from getting into the combat unit were more frequent in T-80 than in T-72. it was said by the military.


                        And as for the engine, then you give a narrow range of conditions. Then, as power, specific power, mobility it is important in any terrain and weather conditions.


                        Well, at T-80 this narrow range is really narrow. This is a hot climate and dust and altitude. stronger effect on gas turbine engine than diesel.

                        And there was money to cut the T-72 into the T-90, as well as to produce 120 new tanks.

                        Yes where are these xnumx tanks? who saw them? wikipedia? and a drop in the ocean is for our army.

                        When sawing metal T-80UD instead of just changing their engines.


                        then everyone sawed and T-72 no less.

                        Yes, well))) okay, I’ll say that it is fully completed, despite obstacles from the Russian Federation, the tanks are in operation and there are no negative reviews, except for the same pubesenok as I quoted.


                        I congratulate you on this)

                        And what to worry about him? They will not do it. The fact that Oplot won the tender is enough for me.

                        u no, my friend, here you are wrong. Winning a tender is only half the battle ...
                      16. Kars
                        Kars 30 December 2015 15: 34 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Johnny
                        The price matters, not only for the tank itself but also for its maintenance, but as you wish. And in what we paid twice, tell me?

                        The fact that they spent money stupidly and got a tank worse than it was available.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        uh) you said about T-72, "Export? What other expotre? T-72 is a mobilization tank."

                        Yes, the T-72 was a mobilization tank, and it was exported as a non-secrecy tank, as was the T-55 / 62. And many of the countries who had de-T-72 on their armament were T-55 .

                        Quote: Johnny
                        thanks of course) but how did you define that?))

                        you don’t want to think, and read in a topic that you are poorly versed in.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        what's worse besides the SLA?

                        A SLA is not enough? Armor was worse))
                        Quote: Johnny
                        Given that if there is money for newer and better equipment, why not sell the old one. Is it logical? This is not to say that the T-72 is bad.

                        You fundamentally do not understand the topic - the decision was about how the T-72 appeared in a large number of countries after the collapse of the Warsaw Pact.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        In Chechnya, defeats from getting into the combat unit were more frequent in T-80 than in T-72. it was said by the military.

                        And of course you have statistics? Or rely on one sensational video with Grachev?
                        Quote: Johnny
                        Well, at T-80 this narrow range is really narrow. This is a hot climate and dust and altitude. stronger effect on gas turbine engine than diesel.

                        Are you twisting something again? A hot climate and dustiness is narrow compared to other climatic zones, and you’re also pointing to the highlands with a finger))
                        Quote: Johnny
                        Yes where are these xnumx tanks? who saw them? wikipedia? and a drop in the ocean is for our army.

                        Do you deny that they were made? Have you seen that they were not made? And there are photos of them. Even in Syria, these are the cars now, without Katrina.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        then everyone sawed and T-72 no less.

                        But the T-90 did. At the same time, God bless them with the T-72, but the T-80UD were new, only from the factory.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        u no, my friend, here you are wrong. Winning a tender is only half the battle ...

                        This is an indicator of the quality of the machine. This is not to sell to India T-90 where the USSR built a tank factory for the assembly of T-72)
                      17. johnny
                        johnny 30 December 2015 16: 07 New
                        +3
                        In short, no real argument from you) only fantasies)) only if, yes, if only ... T-72 Mr., T-64 and T-80 super and so on. etc. We spent a lot of money, sawed the loot. The plant in India already was. In short, we were lucky with India))) and so we are mediocre who sawed the T-80 and sawed Mr. T-90))) and you only understand this, and everyone else does not understand the topic.

                        Then accidentally stumbled upon your old comment in 2013. on that website. Smiled) especially about the cooperation between Ukraine and China.

                        Quote: Kars
                        If Armata appears (which is no longer a fact) and can show outstanding characteristics (which is already doubtful), then China, which is actively cooperating with the military-industrial complex of Ukraine, in the above privacy with the tank industry, may well intensify cooperation and finance the creation of a new generation tank with the participation of Ukrainian enterprises . While China is already building tanks comparable to Russian ones. Therefore, the appearance of Armata could potentially be beneficial to Ukraine.

                        Well, how has China not yet stepped up cooperation with you there? laughing
                        or now you will begin to water Armata)?
                      18. Kars
                        Kars 30 December 2015 17: 09 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Johnny
                        In short, not a single real argument from you) only some fantasies))

                        All arguments are real and reasonable.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        T-72 Mr., T-64 and T-80 Super

                        Do you think that the USSR military-industrial complex in the tank industry after the T-72 degraded, and the T-80, which is worse than the T-72, was adopted?
                        Quote: Johnny
                        Orocha was lucky for us with India))) and so we are mediocre who sawed T-80 and sawed Mr. T-90)))

                        Namely. Still lucky with South Korea and Cyprus who bought the T-80
                        Quote: Johnny
                        Well, how has China not yet stepped up cooperation with you there?

                        But what do you think not? Only Arimaty is not yet. And when it will be in commercial quantities, especially in the current pricing policy for hydrocarbons, it is not known.
                        Quote: Johnny
                        or now you will begin to water Armata)

                        In order to water it, you need to know at least some characteristics. And so it’s very big and still there’s no video test of Afghanistan, not even rumors.
                      19. padded jacket
                        padded jacket 30 December 2015 17: 24 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Kars
                        Still lucky with South Korea and Cyprus who bought the T-80U

                        Well, here you are a little "cunning" South Korea did not purchase the T-80 but received them on account of the debt payment that he took from GK Gorbachev and naturally the Koreans chose the newest that was in service with Russia at that time - the T-80 and BMP-3.
                      20. Kars
                        Kars 30 December 2015 17: 33 New
                        +1
                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        naturally, the Koreans chose the newest that was at that time in Russia in service - the T-80 and BMP-3.

                        That is, lohan? Took the newest and not the best T-72?
                        And there they bought, borrowed, what's the difference? It's more fun when T-90 or Abrams buy on related loans from manufacturers, and then presenting it as evidence of the steepness of the objects.
                      21. padded jacket
                        padded jacket 30 December 2015 17: 49 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Kars
                        That is, lohan? Took the newest and not the best T-72?

                        Why did you loaf?
                        Those modifications of the T-72 that were in our arsenal at the time were designed all the same for the second wave, so that they had more simplified equipment than the T-80.
                        Quote: Kars
                        And there they bought, borrowed, what difference does it make?

                        The difference is simply enormous. South Korea had to take military equipment on account of the debt, which, in principle, it was and did not need, because nobody simply offered to take it for money.
                      22. Kars
                        Kars 30 December 2015 18: 00 New
                        +1
                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        Those modifications of the T-72 that were in our arsenal at the time were designed all the same for the second wave, so that they had more simplified equipment than the T-80.

                        That is, the T-72 in 1995 was worse than the T-80? How so you break Johnny’s illusions

                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        The difference is simply huge South Korea had to take military equipment

                        The same thing when a third country is given a loan to buy from a lender Technics. And I think if Korea could get other equipment or raw materials.

                        By the way, Comrade Marshal, do you want to make fun of the banderlog? Can you imagine what the model of Almaty will look like on my shelf next to the T-64 or Bulat?
                      23. padded jacket
                        padded jacket 30 December 2015 18: 45 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Kars
                        That is, the T-72 in 1995 was worse than the T-80U

                        Serial modifications that were created back in the Soviet Union and were in the army were no worse and only equipped with more "simple" equipment. In all likelihood, no one simply gave the latest modifications to the T-72 tank and did it right.
                        Quote: Kars
                        how so you Johnny break illusions

                        I do not break anything. The T-72 was ultimately chosen as the more technologically advanced and adapted for mass production, especially our head plant for the production of tanks The Uralvagonzavod was geared specifically for their production and there was no point in changing anything on it.
                        Quote: Kars
                        The same thing when a third country is given a loan to buy from a lender Technics. And I think if Korea could get other equipment or raw materials.

                        I think the question was not what you think.
                        And so - either take military equipment which we have extremely much now or get the money we just don’t know in this decade or the next, or maybe you won’t get it at all.
                        UK made its choice smile
                        Quote: Kars
                        By the way, Comrade Marshal do not want to mock Banderlog?

                        If by banderlog you mean yourself, then no.
                        I "LITTLE" DO NOT OFFEND lol
                        Quote: Kars
                        Can you imagine what the model of Almaty will look like on my shelf next to the T-64 or Bulat?

                        Simply fantastic - the tank of the future T-14 next to its ancient "grandfathers" T-64 and "Bulat" smile
                      24. johnny
                        johnny 30 December 2015 18: 47 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Kars

                        That is, the T-72 in 1995 was worse than the T-80? How so you break Johnny’s illusions

                        I, unlike you, have no illusions.
                        Where did you read from me that the T-72B was better or worse than the T-80U? if the MO wanted, it could bring the T-72B to the T-80U level by suo very quickly. The trouble was that they had no desire. The undercover fight for these tanks was also not frail and lobbied the T-80 very well.
                      25. Kars
                        Kars 30 December 2015 19: 28 New
                        +1
                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        were in the army were no worse and only equipped with more "simple" equipment.

                        That is worse
                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        Apparently, nobody just gave the latest modifications of the T-72 tank to the SC and did it right

                        And why is the T-90 mod 1992 better than the T-80?
                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        why I do not break T-72 in the end they chose as more technological and adapted to mass production

                        Mass production? You want to say they promised cheaper)) since there was something mass production
                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        I think the question was not what you think.

                        Vryatli. Debt he and Africa debt, like barter
                        Quote: quilted jacket
                        Simply fantastic - the tank of the future T-14 next to its ancient "grandfathers" T-64 and Bulat

                        Well, send it)) the Jews sent 4 to Merkavu and Akharid)) but the patriots of the Russian Federation cheers something weak. (Ilyich is definitely not a patriot cheers)
                        Quote: Johnny
                        if desired, the MO could bring the T-72B to the level of T-80U by suo very quickly.

                        ))) and it turned out T-90))) for a lot of money and with the loss of 15 years of time.
                      26. Kars
                        Kars 30 December 2015 19: 41 New
                        +1
                        _________________________
                      27. johnny
                        johnny 30 December 2015 20: 51 New
                        +1
                        Quote: Kars

                        Well, send it)) the Jews sent Merkava 4 and Akharid)) but the patriots of the Russian Federation cheers something weak.

                        Ha. Jews for free that they are already sending Khokhlam. No wonder they say "where the crest went, the Jew has nothing to do" laughing
          2. johnny
            johnny 30 December 2015 18: 27 New
            +1
            Quote: Kars

            All arguments are real and reasonable.

            Who are they based on? you?

            Do you think that the USSR military-industrial complex in the tank industry after the T-72 degraded, and the T-80, which is worse than the T-72, was adopted?


            I repeat once again. worse - better is only you who determine. but in a global war. The USSR needed both types of cars. Moreover, a large serial production could be provided only by a UVZ with their diesel engine, which could be used on other types of equipment, not only on tanks, unlike the T-80 with their gas turbine engine and T-64 with 5TDF


            Namely. Still lucky with South Korea and Cyprus who bought the T-80


            Well, you probably know better there in Ukraine)


            What do you think not?


            Enlighten. Very interesting.

            That's just Arimaty not yet.


            Was there a hologram in the parade?


            And when will be in commercial quantities, especially in the current pricing policy for hydrocarbons is unknown.


            so she already is. serial production is not yet.


            To water it, you need to know at least some characteristics.


            Do you know ALL the characteristics of the T-90?


            And so very big

            no more NATO tanks

            and until now there is no video test of Afghanistan, not even rumors.

            before that you said that it doesn’t shoot and even the tower doesn’t rotate) Maybe you should show everything in a second shoot? Kindergarten is direct.
          3. Kars
            Kars 30 December 2015 19: 34 New
            +1
            Quote: Johnny
            Who are they based on? you?

            USSR Ministry of Defense when they decided to make the T-80UD a single tank of the USSR, and re-profile UVZ to produce this type of tank.
            Quote: Johnny
            The USSR needed both types of cars. Moreover, only UVZ could provide a large serial production

            Well, yes Omsk, Lenegrad, Kharkov could not mass-produce tanks
            Quote: Johnny
            which could and was used on other types of equipment,

            for other types, the T-55 / 62 bases were enough
            Quote: Johnny
            Enlighten. Very interesting.

            You didn’t know about Pakistan either, you probably don’t know about Al Khalid and MVT-2000 either, so you’re curious
            Quote: Johnny
            Do you know ALL the characteristics of the T-90?

            Publicly available yes, like T-80U UD, T-84 Oplot which are participants in exhibitions and tenders
            Quote: Johnny
            no more NATO tanks

            Bigger and significantly
            Quote: Johnny
            before that you said that it doesn’t shoot and even the tower does not rotate

            Maybe he did, but they showed the shooting video.
            Quote: Johnny
            Maybe you should show everything in a second shoot? Kindergarten is direct.

            Trophy and Barrier video is, Korean developments and tests
          4. johnny
            johnny 30 December 2015 20: 29 New
            +1
            Quote: Kars

            Well, yes Omsk, Lenegrad, Kharkov could not mass-produce tanks

            geographically and in such numbers as UVZ no.

            for other types, the T-55 / 62 bases were enough


            I spoke about unification of engines, but maybe B-2 from T-34 was enough, it doesn’t say anything.

            You didn’t know about Pakistan either, you probably don’t know about Al Khalid and MVT-2000 either, so you’re curious

            Well then) your participation there is only an engine)
            and so it’s a Sino-Pakistani tank.
            you talked about the Sino-Ukrainian tank, a sort of armast answer.

            Publicly available yes, like T-80U UD, T-84 Oplot which are participants in exhibitions and tenders


            Well, as publicly available, how can you evaluate something? they are almost all the same data)

            Quote: Johnny
            no more NATO tanks

            Bigger and significantly


            except for an uninhabited tower it’s smaller even in height.


            Maybe he did, but they showed the shooting video.

            surprisingly, yes?) and you thought we were doing layouts)

            Trophy and Barrier video is, Korean developments and tests


            it doesn’t say anything, there was no video about shooting either.

            USSR Ministry of Defense when they decided to make the T-80UD a single tank of the USSR, and re-profile UVZ to produce this type of tank.


            Was it embodied? Here in Kharkov and with their frail T-64)
            And UVZ wanted to load a contract in 1993 with Iran for the supply of T-72S. But there was such Chernomyrdin who canceled this contract to please the Americans. Then we did not deliver 578 tanks to Iran. And the Poles after that sold their T-72M1 there. Like this.
          5. Kars
            Kars 30 December 2015 21: 03 New
            +1
            Quote: Johnny
            geographically and in such numbers as UVZ no.

            Yah
            Quote: Johnny
            I spoke about unification of engines, but maybe B-2 from T-34 was enough, it doesn’t say anything.

            what is the unification in the USSR at three in the morning
            Quote: Johnny
            Well then) your participation there is only an engine)
            and so it’s a Sino-Pakistani tank.
            you talked about the Sino-Ukrainian tank, a sort of armast answer.

            This is what you think. And yet there is no Armata, and it is obvious that the Chinese are well acquainted with the situation and do not consider prototypes a threat to the 99 type
            Quote: Johnny
            Well, as publicly available, how can you evaluate something? they are almost all the same data)

            except for you
            Quote: Johnny
            except for an uninhabited tower it’s smaller even in height

            Yes, yes of course))) the physical dimensions are also a secret for you, and how can this not be considered a tower? The fact that it is not inhabited does not make it invulnerable
            Quote: Johnny
            it doesn’t say anything, there was no video about shooting either.

            So it is alarming that so far there is no video from KAZ
            Quote: Johnny
            Was it embodied? Here in Kharkov and with their frail T-64)

            The USSR was over, and so it was in the plans.
            And Iran is already after the USSR, so again with a finger to the sky.
          6. Kars
            Kars 30 December 2015 21: 09 New
            +1
            _________________________
          7. johnny
            johnny 30 December 2015 21: 40 New
            +1
            Quote: Kars

            what is the unification in the USSR at three in the morning


            very funny



            This is what you think. And yet there is no Armata, and it is obvious that the Chinese are well acquainted with the situation and do not consider prototypes a threat to the 99 type


            China may also itself will buy Armata))


            except for you


            Well then show your professionalism. Compare for the public TTH T-80U and M1A1)))

            Yes, yes of course))) the physical dimensions are also a secret for you, and how can this not be considered a tower? The fact that it is not inhabited does not make it invulnerable


            what have you posted on top of the photo?) better side and front, so it will be more correct.


            The USSR was over, and so it was in the plans.


            and who shared these plans with you in the USSR?


            And Iran is already after the USSR, so again with a finger to the sky
            .

            I do not think that such contracts are signed and begin to be executed in 1 year. The USSR here had a direct relationship.
          8. Kars
            Kars 30 December 2015 22: 00 New
            +1
            Quote: Johnny
            very funny

            but true
            Quote: Johnny
            China may also itself will buy Armata))

            instead of the Russian Defense Ministry or what?
            Quote: Johnny
            Well then show your professionalism. Compare for the public TTH T-80U and M1A1)))

            I compared it more than once. But you didn’t find it. But you can easily search the Internet. There is. You can also read the descriptions of the Greek tender there T-80 and Abrams competed

            Quote: Johnny
            what did you put on top of the photo?)

            As Nashol laid it out, I don’t have Armata yet, and I won’t see it if the quilted jacket goes red. And that you have canceled the weapons that hit the tanks from above?

            Quote: Johnny
            and who shared these plans with you in the USSR?
            Head of GBTU (1980-1987) Colonel General Yu. Potapov
            Quote: Johnny
            I do not think that such contracts are signed and begin to be executed in 1 year. The USSR here had a direct relationship.

            do not think in vain. maybe faster.
          9. johnny
            johnny 30 December 2015 22: 29 New
            +1
            Quote: Kars

            but true

            what is the truth? justify your words.

            instead of the Russian Defense Ministry or what?


            no in parallel, of course in a simpler configuration))


            I compared it more than once. But you didn’t find it. But you can easily search the Internet. There is.

            And what did you do? link please? it is unlikely that you are so famous that you can easily find it.


            You can also read the descriptions of the Greek tender there T-80U and Abrams competed

            shot at each other from different distances?)


            I do not have Armata yet, and it will not be visible once the quilted jacket is gobbling up.

            That's all you need for free Ukrainians. Take yes buy, on ebay it is full of them.

            And that you have canceled weapons that hit tanks from above?


            And what do you think of modern weapons striking from above, does it really matter whether the hull is half a meter longer or not? or maybe the stronghold is not vulnerable to such weapons? too small?)) But the armata has a KAZ for this. Or what I write, you did not see him in action, then this is a fake))

            Head of GBTU (1980-1987) Colonel General Yu. Potapov

            But what about from 1988-1992? He was not already the head of GBTU? or he personally bequeathed to you to fulfill it)


            do not think in vain. maybe faster.


            Well, if only in Ukraine lol
          10. Kars
            Kars 30 December 2015 23: 01 New
            +1
            Quote: Johnny
            what is the truth? justify your words.

            Do you have three MBTs in service without special unification, which is not enough? Do you still have to substantiate something?
            Quote: Johnny
            no in parallel, of course in a simpler configuration))

            Tell me what recently from the Russian Federation for money and not related loans bought in .. more .. simple equipment? So dreams dreams))
            Quote: Johnny
            And what did you do?

            T-80 is better than the M1A1-HA abram and not links to me, but to other comparisons, and also according to open data
            Quote: Johnny
            shot at each other from different distances?)

            Oh, you still don’t know what’s going on at tank tenders.
            Quote: Johnny
            And what do you think modern weapons striking from above does it matter if the body is half a meter longer or not

            no, it doesn’t matter. every millimeter is more likely to lose - and this is your bald excuse))))

            Quote: Johnny
            or maybe the stronghold is not vulnerable to such weapons? too small?)

            it will be less of course.
            Quote: Johnny
            and Armata has KAZ for this. Or what I write, you did not see him in action, then this is a fake))

            while yes, many have said a lot.
            But you somehow sideways depart from the fact that you stated that Armata is no more than Western tanks)) I hope they understood that more?
            Quote: Johnny
            But what about 1988-1992?

            I answered you who said about the T-80UD a single tank of the USSR, and then your problems. You certainly weren’t even close to such positions either then or now
            Quote: Johnny
            Well, if only in Ukraine

            Not only
            Quote: Johnny
            That's all you need for free Ukrainians. Take yes buy, on ebay it is full of them.

            I won’t buy it from the principle. In my short list for the near future Mark 1 and T-34-85 in 16. So I’ll wait for Vatnik’s generosity, even though you can clearly see in Israel people live better than the average cheer of the Russian patriot.
          11. johnny
            johnny 31 December 2015 09: 04 New
            +1
            Quote: Kars

            Do you have three MBTs in service without special unification, which is not enough? Do you still have to substantiate something?

            Are you a fool or do not know how to read?
            T-t72 unification was with other equipment working on 4T diesel engines. Now it's clear?

            Tell me what recently from the Russian Federation for money and not related loans bought in .. more .. simple equipment? So dreams dreams))


            why are you so afraid of these loans? the whole world lives on them, and Ukraine even allows itself not to give them away)))


            T-80 is better than the M1A1-HA abram and not links to me, but to other comparisons, and also according to open data


            You said that you compared. I’m interested in your arguments as a specialist, especially


            Oh, you still don’t know what’s going on at tank tenders.


            what do the tenders have to do with it? Do all tanks take part in tenders?


            no, it doesn’t matter. every millimeter is more likely to lose - and this is your bald excuse))))


            why not a micron?)) ha three times.

            it will be less of course.

            what is less clear. I asked, not vulnerable? golimaya excuse)))


            But you somehow sideways depart from the fact that you stated that Armata is no more than Western tanks)) I hope they understood that more?


            on top half a meter in length, this did not really convince me, I wrote above. But on the side of the projection and in front of you, no. Although I know perfectly well without you how they will look. And there will not be much difference in the total area of ​​the lesion, especially from modern Fri funds.


            I answered you who said about the T-80UD a single tank of the USSR, and then your problems. You certainly weren’t even close to such positions either then or now

            he said. it doesn't mean done yet. although he had time to say.
            and you’re going straight, very close to such a position)

            Not only


            give then such an example of tanks in peacetime.


            I will not buy it from the principle.


            that’s better, health is more important)


            ps
            But do you know what’s important in a tank?
            it's not about ... when you get into it lol
            what I wish you hi
          12. Kars
            Kars 31 December 2015 11: 45 New
            +1
            Quote: Johnny
            T-t72 unification was with other equipment working on 4T diesel engines. Now it's clear?

            No, why take one T-72 out of the context of the USSR Armed Forces? Against the general background, these are trifles.
            Quote: Johnny
            why are you so afraid of these loans?

            they don’t scare me, it’s just a fact that explains a lot in military contracts.
            Quote: Johnny
            You said that you compared. I’m interested in your arguments as a specialist, especially

            it is clear that you do not need it.
            Quote: Johnny
            why are there tenders? Do all tanks take part in tenders?

            And this is an indicator. And of course.
            Quote: Johnny
            why not a micron?)) ha three times.

            Well, well)) a sectan of the minimum dimensions of Almaty is formed))
            Quote: Johnny
            what is less clear. I asked, not vulnerable? golimaya excuse)))

            less vulnerable since it is smaller in size.
            Quote: Johnny
            top half a meter in length, it didn’t really convince me, I wrote above

            Yes, it’s clear))
            Quote: Johnny
            he said. it doesn't mean done yet

            The USSR collapsed. But the fact remains that T-80UD was planned to be produced at all Soviet tank plants, including UVZ

            Quote: Johnny
            give then such an example on tanks in peacetime

            would follow the tenders maybe they themselves would have guessed
            Quote: Johnny
            that’s better, health is more important)

            where does the health? and so cool excuse the stinginess of some.
          13. johnny
            johnny 31 December 2015 12: 54 New
            +1
            Quote: Kars

            No, why take one T-72 out of the context of the USSR Armed Forces? Against the general background, these are trifles.


            Yes, you have all the little things going on. We discuss specifically BTT, not the whole background.

            they don’t scare me, it’s just a fact that explains a lot in military contracts.

            With other countries, how is it calculated differently? or maybe you are aware of all the contracts that Russia commits? Your categorization is more like youthful maximalism. Or a simple trolling.


            it is clear that you do not need it.

            twenty-five again) I tell him what is needed. and he doesn’t need me with the clever look of a rabbit from Winnie-the-Pooh) So it’s just that there’s nothing) one chatter and empty words. Paper tanker you, not special.

            And this is an indicator. And of course.


            empty words again ...


            Well, well)) a sectan of the minimum dimensions of Almaty is formed))


            fool

            less vulnerable since it is smaller in size.

            how much less vulnerable? do you have statistics or research and calculations?
            empty words again ...

            The USSR collapsed. But the fact remains that T-80UD was planned to be produced at all Soviet tank plants, including UVZ

            What is the fact if this did not happen? you again drag in your illusions the illusions of others)

            would follow the tenders maybe they themselves would have guessed


            again, no specifics ...


            where does the health?

            nerve cells are not restored)


            and so cool excuse stinginess of some.

            for free behind the barn)
          14. Kars
            Kars 1 January 2016 15: 51 New
            +1
            Quote: Johnny
            Yes, you have all the little things going on. We discuss specifically BTT, not the whole background.

            and BTT is an integral part of the background. and even the mentioned unification of T-72 engines against the general background of even BTTs alone is not particularly important. There are much more auxiliary machines based on T-55

            Quote: Johnny
            With other countries, how is it calculated differently?

            Excuse
            Quote: Johnny
            empty words again ...

            naturally for you. It would be better if they just took and read about the tender. Greek is very interesting
            Quote: Johnny
            how much less vulnerable?

            the main thing is less.
            Quote: Johnny
            What is the fact if this did not happen?

            for the good reason of the collapse of the USSR, and it is the fact that T-80UD and not T-72
            Quote: Johnny
            nerve cells are not restored)

            this, incidentally, is also a false statement. although this is to stinginess
            Quote: Johnny
            for free behind the barn)

            unless for you I have a different experience
          15. johnny
            johnny 1 January 2016 19: 32 New
            +3
            Quote: Kars

            unless for you I have a different experience

            With the world on a thread? lol
          16. Kars
            Kars 1 January 2016 19: 46 New
            +1
            Quote: Johnny
            With the world on a thread?

            And it will be a great collection. But it can be seen without Armata.
      2. padded jacket
        padded jacket 1 January 2016 16: 08 New
        +1
        Quote: Johnny
        Paper tanker you, not special.

        Don't you understand yet? This is an ordinary “child” who has not yet joined the army and knows the world around him using tank models and posting photos of his kitties lol
      3. Kars
        Kars 1 January 2016 16: 29 New
        +1
        I'll ask)) plastic)) And the tanks are more specialized than you and Johnny))
        And by the way there is literature and the Internet))
        By the way, you still have not boasted your library)))
      4. johnny
        johnny 1 January 2016 18: 55 New
        0
        Quote: Kars
        more special

        you are a demagogue)
        better stick your tanks, I hope you get it better than talking about them)

        And about less vulnerable due to size. Who do you think is more likely to survive from a shellfire for example. Do Bulat or Almaty?)))
      5. padded jacket
        padded jacket 1 January 2016 19: 17 New
        +2
        Quote: Kars
        And so on tanks a bigger special

        Yes special you special lol just don’t be nervous so your hands will tremble and you won’t be able to glue the new Merkava-4 smile
        Thailand abandoned the Ukrainian Oplot tank and chooses between T-90MS and MVT-3000
        http://rusvesna.su/news/1450805610

        How do people like you like to scream - Glory to Ukraine lol
      6. Kars
        Kars 1 January 2016 19: 49 New
        +1
        Quote: quilted jacket
        you are a demagogue)

        I communicate precisely by the level of the opponent. You are not even a demogog, but simply not competitors. How to play chess with a pigeon - he still puzzles pieces, shit on a dos and flies away. So, talking to you doesn’t make diagrams.
        Quote: quilted jacket
        ayland abandoned the Ukrainian Oplot tank and chooses between T-90MS and MVT-3000

        As a link to Thailand MoD you will have it and come.


        chances to survive from a hellfare for example. Do Bulat or Almaty?)))

        Of course, Armata, since she does not, and Helfire simply has nothing to work on.
      7. johnny
        johnny 1 January 2016 20: 02 New
        +2
        Quote: Kars

        I communicate

        It’s useless to communicate with you; you don’t perceive any other point of view except yours. You consider yourself smarter than others. But in fact, you are zero without a stick, which was read on Wikipedia, glued several tanks and imagines yourself God knows who.


        Of course, Armata, since she does not, and Helfire simply has nothing to work on.


        be patient, here are no more strongholds to the campaign))
      8. Kars
        Kars 1 January 2016 20: 14 New
        +1
        Quote: Johnny
        it is useless to communicate with you, you don’t perceive any other point of view

        And what is your point of view? And how is it confirmed? Have you brought at least one fact? I brought you my words even with a person with a surname and position. You all jumped stupidly.
        Why do I owe you something when you couldn’t bring what the T-90 was better than the T-80 in 1991-98 except for the ghostly cheapness and fuel consumption.
        Quote: Johnny
        be patient, here are no more strongholds to the campaign)

        It’s hard to believe. And the stronghold has already won the tender.
      9. johnny
        johnny 1 January 2016 21: 33 New
        +1
        Quote: Kars

        He even brought a person with a surname and position. You all that could stupidly jump.


        We apparently talk about different things with you. You are about how it could be. And I tell you how it is and why it happened. At least reality is on my side)
        Surnames, positions .. maybe he wanted and what next? Why then did he not do this for so many years? and after it, even before the collapse of the union, there was plenty of time. One person does not solve such issues.


        Why do I owe you something when you could not bring what the T-90 was better than the T-80U in 1991-98?


        But was there a conversation about this? you constantly move somewhere in your judgment. You do not know how to listen.


        except for ghostly cheapness and fuel consumption.


        well maybe for you and ghostly


        It’s hard to believe. And the stronghold has already won the tender.

        it would be better for their army to do something. Although in your case now, it’s better not. Fewer people will die ...
      10. Kars
        Kars 1 January 2016 21: 47 New
        +1
        Quote: Johnny
        And I tell you how it is and why it happened

        And I’m saying that something stupid happened. That to reach T-72 to the level of T-80U huge amounts of money were wasted.
        Quote: Johnny
        Surnames, positions .. maybe he wanted and what next? Why then did he not do this for so many years?

        There was a lot of time and he didn’t want, but the USSR Ministry of Defense and the process began. And I repeat once again in defiance of your assertion that the military chose T-72, the military chose T-80UD

        Quote: Johnny
        But was there a conversation about this?

        that's about it.
        Quote: Johnny
        well maybe for you and ghostly

        Amid spending on the development of the T-90 and the release of hundreds of tanks of course.
        Quote: Johnny
        it would be better for your army to do something

        And no one thought that there would be a war.
      11. johnny
        johnny 1 January 2016 22: 26 New
        0
        Quote: Kars

        And I’m saying that something stupid happened. That to reach T-72 to the level of T-80U huge amounts of money were wasted.


        Why was it wasted) T-90 appeared and generally retained production. With other options, money would be spent no less! And the fact that the T-72 could be brought to the level of the T-80UD much earlier, at the same time with the T-80U, that's for sure. Politics was just different. And no one thought that the USSR would collapse.


        the military chose just the T-80UD


        Well, let it be your way if you feel better)
      12. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 1 January 2016 23: 03 New
        +1
        Quote: Kars
        And I’m saying that something stupid happened. That to reach T-72 to the level of T-80U huge amounts of money were wasted.

        What kind of huge money are we talking about?
        What is the main difference between the T-80u and the T-72:
        Chassis, engine and OMS. Chassis with the engine worked out on various modifications of the T-72. MSA made one Russian enterprise for all tanks of the USSR. The T-72 was equipped with a more powerful defense against the Steel Research Institute (which also developed the protection for the T-64), a more powerful engine, and an already developed (on other tanks) FCS.
        And where are the big money costs?
      13. Kars
        Kars 3 January 2016 09: 56 New
        +1
        Quote: Johnny
        With other options, money would be spent no less!

        Oh well) Would the T-80U have spent more money on serial production? It would have been much cheaper to put a Russian diesel engine on the T-80U than to cut the T-72.
        Quote: Johnny
        that the T-72 could be brought to the level of T-80UD

        The mobilization tank, he is the mobilization tank
        Quote: Johnny
        Well, let it be your way if you feel better)

        and here I am to this fact.
      14. johnny
        johnny 3 January 2016 19: 44 New
        -1
        Quote: Kars

        Oh well) Would mass production of T-80U spend more money?

        Yes. If you decided to re-install the UVZ for its release.


        It would be much cheaper to supply a Russian diesel engine to the T-80U than to overpower the T-72.


        Not cheaper than putting the best suo on the T-72


        and here I am to this fact.

        the fact is that the T-80s are no longer being produced.
  • uwzek
    uwzek 29 December 2015 18: 11 New
    +1
    Quote: Kars
    and what? is this some sort of impossible trick?

    Impossible enough. An engine with gearboxes will not fit into the bow of our tanks (there is not enough volume). You will have to cut the nose off the finished body, and weld the inserts on the sides. Then, you need to move the shoulder straps of the tower to the back, that is, again cut out the details of the case and insert the patches. Only the bottom can remain intact, but it is not flat, but has a rather complex shape, so it will have to be changed. In any case, it’s much cheaper to make the case from scratch, and not to remake it ready. An ax porridge is a similar attempt to transfer an engine.
    1. Kars
      Kars 29 December 2015 19: 06 New
      +1
      Quote: uwzek
      Impossible enough.

      Above, even photos of this impossible were laid out.
      Quote: uwzek
      Untouched

      Yes, it's probably hard to think like that. Untouched, Karl)) untouched.
      1. svp67
        svp67 1 January 2016 16: 41 New
        +1
        Quote: Kars
        Impossible enough.

        hi Well, what will you argue now that Ukraine is capable of producing tanks on a mass scale without Russia, or have you already realized that how much?
        1. Kars
          Kars 1 January 2016 16: 52 New
          +1
          hi Happy new year
          Only the quote is not mine.
          As for the production - they did fulfill the Pakistani contract. That means they could. According to the Art systems - here I never realized - there was no production on the territory of the Ukrainian SSR.
          And there we will look to Kharkov, like a billion hryvnias Yatsenyuk signed with guarantees for tanks. I do not see the impossible. I see the incompetence of the leadership.
        2. svp67
          svp67 1 January 2016 16: 56 New
          +1
          Quote: Kars
          As for producing, the Pakistani contract has been fulfilled.

          With the support of Russia - YES. Personally, EBN gave permission for the supply of critical components for Ukraine. Russia, at that time, simply could not deal with Pakistan, and so we raped the money from this contract. Business and nothing personal
          .According to Art systems - here I have never spoiled; there was no production of them on the territory of the Ukrainian SSR.
          Who told you this? The famous "Carnation" was going to Kharkov in Kharkov.
          And there we will look to Kharkov, like a billion hryvnias Yatsenyuk signed with guarantees for tanks. I do not see the impossible. I see the incompetence of the leadership.
          This is very, very little. The path that is now chosen is more correct. If you can assemble the chassis, that is, the base chassis, at the very least, then everything else is worth buying or begging for. Modern artillery barrels, this is a very complex product and what you could produce in Sumy, could satisfy only in the big war that the USSR was preparing for. This is when it was required to produce many trunks of not very high quality. And shooting devices. So generally.
        3. Kars
          Kars 1 January 2016 17: 00 New
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          With the support of Russia - YES. Personally, EBN gave permission for the supply of critical components for Ukraine.

          and where can I read about it? whereas how exactly is it known that the trunks did not sell machine guns do not sell
          Quote: svp67
          and so we have raped money from this contract. Business and nothing personal

          and that’s what they didn’t.
          The famous "Carnation" was going to Kharkov in Kharkov.
          and Motovilikha did the art part for her or not?

          This is very, very little
          This money is for tanks, and not for new developments.
        4. svp67
          svp67 1 January 2016 17: 09 New
          +1
          Quote: Kars
          while it’s known for sure that the trunks weren’t sold

          It was at the initial stage, then there were deliveries. Once agreed.
          Quote: Kars
          and that’s what they didn’t.

          There is such a thing - cooperation. Any plant in the military-industrial complex, in the former territory of the USSR, never did everything when it was produced. Our localization process has now received a proud name - "import substitution" and its truly significant results will be only in 2017. Are you sure that you are still sure that Ukraine itself built tanks?
        5. Kars
          Kars 1 January 2016 17: 15 New
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          then there were deliveries. After agreed

          Where can I read about this? I know that people from Motovillichi helped establish production of trunks at Sumy NGO Frunze
          and machine guns so bought in romania
          Quote: svp67
          Are you sure that you are still sure that Ukraine itself built tanks?

          In the days of the USSR? Then we must also say that Russia, too, did not build everything.
        6. svp67
          svp67 1 January 2016 17: 34 New
          +1
          Quote: Kars
          Where can I read about it?

          Alas, in the current situation, I think that not soon. We don’t want to remember about it now.
          Quote: Kars
          I know that people from motovillichi helped establish production of trunks at Sumy NGO Frunze
          In addition, components were delivered for engines, electronics, etc., etc., both from us and from Belarus.
          Quote: Kars
          then we must also say that Russia, too, did not build everything.

          I have never claimed this.
        7. Kars
          Kars 1 January 2016 17: 48 New
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          you, but in the current situation, I think that it is not fast

          How is it? It's already 15 years have passed. How many monographs came out.
          Quote: svp67
          In addition, components were delivered for engines, electronics, etc., etc., both from us and from Belarus.

          And what? They bought their chain? Is it really forbidden? I bought French spare parts on the T-90 of the Russian Federation. At the same time, I would like to know exactly what exactly from the Russian Federation.
      2. svp67
        svp67 1 January 2016 17: 47 New
        +1
        Quote: Kars
        I know that people from motovillichi helped establish production of trunks at Sumy NGO Frunze

        And this is if there was at that time in Kiev at the Bolshevik factory a special design bureau for artillery systems, the tasks of which, in particular, included the tasks of setting up production of gun barrels.
        Quote: Kars
        and machine guns so bought in romania

        In Romania, 7,62 mm caliber machine guns were produced, I wonder, where did 12,7 mm come from?
      3. Kars
        Kars 1 January 2016 17: 53 New
        +1
        Quote: svp67
        And this, if there was a special design bureau on artillery systems at the Bolshevik plant in Kiev at that time

        Design Bureau, but it was not deployed in mass production, and tank guns there were not going to do at first.
        Last year they wrote that 33 made a new tank barrel.
        Quote: svp67
        and where did 12,7 mm come from?

        most likely from warehouses therefore now in anti-terrorist operation and lack of NSVT
      4. svp67
        svp67 1 January 2016 18: 06 New
        +1
        Quote: Kars
        Design Bureau, but it was not deployed in mass production, and tank guns there were not going to do at first.

        The workshop at the design bureau of the Bolshevik plant was not only capable of producing tank barrels, but also intended to do so. It was this enterprise that was supposed to supply guns for Kharkov. But during the collapse of the USSR, production was destroyed. And now I can say that, thank God.
        Quote: Kars
        most likely from warehouses therefore now in anti-terrorist operation and lack of NSVT

        Do not make me laugh. In Ukraine, stocks were concentrated to supply the FOUR groups of troops and THREE military districts. What do you think, to provide such colossals, how many machine guns were required in stock? So, better ask yourself, WHERE DOES IT ALL HERE?
      5. Kars
        Kars 1 January 2016 18: 59 New
        +1
        Quote: svp67
        But during the collapse of the USSR, production was destroyed.

        Then what was the question? 1992 vryatli who thought about the Pakistani contract. Then they somehow restored it. Collaboration with the Swiss on the 140 mm gun.
        Quote: svp67
        Do not make me laugh. In Ukraine, stockpiles were concentrated to supply FOUR groups of troops and THREE military districts

        The difficult question is what was there, what went where. But still, the 22 of the year was for sale. Otherwise, why and why was it necessary to buy FCT from Bulgaria if in bulk.
        Quote: svp67
        So, better ask yourself, WHERE DOES IT ALL HERE?

        Why? And it’s so clear what they sold. Ukraine was not going to support a millionth army.
      6. Kars
        Kars 3 January 2016 09: 57 New
        +1
        Gyulchatai minus one open face. Or write something nibut))))))
  • svp67
    svp67 1 January 2016 16: 35 New
    +1
    Quote: uwzek
    Impossible enough.

    Do not make me laugh...
    Here are two vehicles created on the basis of the T-34, and this tank’s internal structure is much more complicated than modern tanks for such a conversion
    Su-100

    Su100M
  • svp67
    svp67 1 January 2016 16: 48 New
    0
    Quote: uwzek
    The engine with gearboxes will not fit into the bow of our tanks (not enough volume)

    Do you seriously believe that? Thank you laugh. Here are the designs of the Design Bureau of Kharkov Plant named after Malysheva
    What is “difficult” in your opinion, is considered impossible to do ...
    BMP based on the T-64, with a front-mounted MTO

    BMP based on T55, MTO the same front

    But what is likely to become this self-propelled gun. BS80 based on the TXNUMX with front MTO
  • Konstantin Yu
    Konstantin Yu 29 December 2015 14: 05 New
    0
    ... I think in Europe I would not mind money laundering and fucking through the Ukrainian laundry ... but why do they need this country?
  • _my opinion
    _my opinion 29 December 2015 15: 43 New
    +3
    my thoughts:
    - development needs resources (time, money, specialists)
    - resources are needed to fine-tune the mind (again, time, money, specialists)
    - resources are needed to start mass production (again time, money, specialists + equipment and proven technology)
    - for the qualitative use of weapons we need such components: trained people (who can effectively use the weapon they are given), skillful command (knowing + and - weapons, skillfully using it +), skillful interacting forces - cover, supply, reconnaissance
  • Type 63
    Type 63 29 December 2015 17: 23 New
    -1
    Chinese Type 95 - what kind of beast? As far as I know, in nature there are Type 90, 98 and 99. The self-propelled guns shown in the photo suspiciously look like K9.
  • AX
    AX 29 December 2015 17: 35 New
    +2
    The production culture is lost ... And it cannot be restored. Alas and ah ...
  • Yak28
    Yak28 29 December 2015 20: 38 New
    0
    While Ukraine is spoiling Russia with slopping mud, the West will help it, but in the West they are afraid to equip Kiev with new equipment, because during the battle, this equipment will most likely get to the militias. And the “evil” Russians will learn about Western technologies. Therefore one junk is coming to Ukraine, which is cheaper to ship to Ukraine than to recycle. And on its tanks, Kiev can beg for money from new American friends
  • wow
    wow 29 December 2015 21: 27 New
    +1
    On humpbacked, squalid Ukrainian roads lurks a rusty, finished motorbike proudly called the "strongest army in Europe."
  • CRASH
    CRASH 31 December 2015 02: 14 New
    -1
    Well, Germany is in the dams, and secured for many years with orders. The same thing happened when we distributed the stools for pennies, and the Ministry of Construction signed with the Eveks, even though the leoperds had no brains to buy from the Germans, otherwise it would have been a shame of 100 years ahead.
  • Tjeck
    Tjeck 31 December 2015 17: 54 New
    +1
    I don’t see the point in covering Ukrainian developments from any angle. We are not small children, and we all understand perfectly that none of this will go into service. In general, all this malice is insulting to me, because in fact they are systematically destroying grains of the once-great Soviet Union. The fact that society in Ukraine has degraded rather than tragedy than a circus.
  • Mikhail Krapivin
    Mikhail Krapivin 31 December 2015 19: 43 New
    0
    The people, only no offense. I read the polemic between Kars and Gray and did not understand only one thing. And what is the meaning of this canoe, a mutant of Ukrainian-German unnatural love on the basis of the Bastion, if there is already a ready Coalition? Well, Ukrainians will build it in some years, with sweat, blood and such a mother. May be. Probably. Well, she’ll even shoot three kilometers further than Msta. Hooray. The fact that there are no shells for it is not a problem, the Germans will present for poverty. The fact that shells need to be pulled across half of Europe does not matter, hunting is more than captivity. BUT MEANING WHAT ?! They will attach them to the Donbass, ours will attach the Coalition symmetrically there, and so what? It will be the same garbage as it is now, that is, an equivalent duel, and due to the professional training of our gunners, as now, ours will again be on top, and Turchinov will again complain about "they shoot very accurately." So again the question is - what is the point then? Well, unless you steal and cut the budget, then there are no questions, it’s sacred to cut the budget ...
  • Nirvanko
    Nirvanko 1 January 2016 22: 14 New
    +1
    The Ukrainian military-industrial complex was buried by the efforts of the seluks seizing power. If you abandon the Soviet weapons - the creation of which the Ukrainian military-industrial complex was tied to Russia with which they successfully broke all production ties - then you need to create everything from scratch together with Western companies. But I do not think that Western companies are so reckless to invest in cooperation with Ukrainian ones. Absolutely no sense.

    Nobody will transfer production to them under the license of the same PzH 2000 cannon because it is a technology transfer and this is only allowed to the closest allies. For example, for a tank gun Rheinmetall L55 is the United States, South Korea and Japan. And to sell purely trunks - well, why would they do this if it is more profitable to sell not the barrel but the self-propelled guns themselves.

    It turns out that the military-industrial complex of Ukraine will rapidly degrade, the supply of weapons will be possible only from the NATO countries. But they will not supply modern weapons due to the fact that Ukraine does not have the means to purchase them and because of the pressure of Russia. Junk will be pushing ala Saxon armored cars.

    And even if relations between Russia and Ukraine normalize - which is extremely unlikely with the authorities that are now there - it will be too late, because in Russia the process of replacing Ukrainian components is already in full swing.
  • Gunther
    Gunther 5 January 2016 06: 36 New
    0
    ... the engine is located at the rear. And the PzH 2000 is ahead. And how it is thought to solve this problem at HTZ is not yet clear at all ...

    Given where Ukraine is moving, under the strict guidance of Pendoshkan lackeys, the solution is obvious - the pepelats will move backwards, a sort of Svidomo panzerskarabey)))
    Since a sad fate is destined for Ukrainian industry, after ratification
    Association agreements with the EU will gradually be purchased by plants and factories that do not meet EU standards, and energy-intensive enterprises will be the first to capitalize, KhTZ can be renamed to KhtoTeperZnat.