Do Russian Tanks Suck?

[Jf Thunder]

yup, pretty much

 

[waz]

No they don't and for what they were put out for i.e. mass numbers, reliable and a decent level of force projection they are great.

However do they have anything comparable to the Leopard./Abrams/ Challenger no, they don't.

I remember Zraver who was an ex US army tanker busted many "myths" on this very forum. Autoloader v 4 man crew? 4 man crew wins all day......

 

[500]

WW2 Russian T-34 about equal to US Sherman.
1950-es Russian T-54/55 about equal to US M48.
1960-es & early 70-es US M60 have an edge over Russian T-62 thanks to excellent L7 gun, better FCS and transmission.
second half of 1970-es Russian T-72 have an edge over US T-60 due to composite armor and large gun.
1980-es and 1990-es US M1 have an edge over Russian T-72 and T-80 due to FCS (especially night vision), blast doors.
2000-es Russian T-90 with french thermals close gap.

 

[Mugwop]

T-34 was one of the best tanks ever made.

 

[Superboy]

KV-1 was a monster of a tank. The US and Germany had no heavy tank in the 1930s like Russia did.

 

[Informant]

In one word: yes.

Their ships also sucks bbc.

Why BBC, why not BTC or BWC

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

T-34 was one of the best tanks ever made.

And the most destroyed tank, percentage based.

KV-1 was a monster of a tank. The US and Germany had no heavy tank in the 1930s like Russia did.

Play some World of Tanks. There was no such thing as a monster tank until the Russians built one to make Stalin happy.

 

[Superboy]

And the most destroyed tank, percentage based.

Most of Russian tank losses were due to German 88 mm flak guns. T-34 was superior to German tanks until Panther came along in 1943 which adopted T-34's sloped armor which is extremely effective.

 

[500]

KV-1 was a monster of a tank. The US and Germany had no heavy tank in the 1930s like Russia did.

KV-1 had very poor mobility, that's why it suck.

 

[Mugwop]

And the most destroyed tank, percentage based.


Play some World of Tanks. There was no such thing as a monster tank until the Russians built one to make Stalin happy.

Well T-34 was a noisy tank which gave the germans an advantage but you gotta look at the numerical superiority that the russians had T-34 were easily mass produced.Not only were they faster than german tanks but sloped armor provided better protection for the crew without the weight increasing.

Most of Russian tank losses were due to German 88 mm flak guns. T-34 was superior to German tanks until Panther came along in 1943 which adopted T-34's sloped armor which is extremely effective.

Panther's side Armor was 50 mm thick.The T-34/85 could penetrate the Panther's side Armor at over 2500 meter with ap shells.

 

[500]

Well T-34 was a noisy tank which gave the germans an advantage but you gotta look at the numerical superiority that the russians had T-34 were easily mass produced.

Thats myth. Here the main reasons why Soviets produced more tanks than Germans:

1) Soviets mobilized their economy first.
2) Soviets received massive aid from US, while Germans were bombed.
3) Germans produced thousand submarines, V-1 and V-2 rockets in addition to tanks, Soviets concentrated on tanks.

Not only were they faster than german tanks

They were not faster. Their transmission sucked.

but sloped armor provided better protection for the crew without the weight increasing.

There is nothing special about slopped armor. Even the WW1 FT-17 had slopped armor.

Panther's side Armor was 50 mm thick.The T-34/85 could penetrate the Panther's side Armor at over 2500 meter with ap shells.

But u dont show sides.

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

Thats myth. Here the main reasons why Soviets produced more tanks than Germans:
1) Soviets mobilized their economy first.
2) Soviets received massive aid from US, while Germans were bombed.
3) Germans produced thousand submarines, V-1 and V-2 rockets in addition to tanks, Soviets concentrated on tanks.

4) Manpower
5) Unprepared German Military
6)

There is nothing special about slopped armor. Even the WW1 FT-17 had slopped armor.

Your an ex-Israeli Soldier, so, i'm not going to piss you off. Your right there's nothing new about sloped Armour on a tank, but while nations were more focused on adding thickness to tanks, the Soviets decided to promote slope over weight. Thus the model for Modern Battle Tanks the T-34.

 

[500]

Your an ex-Israeli Soldier, so, i'm not going to piss you off. Your right there's nothing new about sloped Armour on a tank, but while nations were more focused on adding thickness to tanks, the Soviets decided to promote slope over weight. Thus the model for Modern Battle Tanks the T-34.

Lets suppose that hulls front area is 3 m2. You want to protect it with 100 mm armor. When unsloped it will weight 3*0.1*7800=2.34 t.

Now u take 50 mm armor with 60 grad slop. It will have the same 100 mm LOS thickness. But did u save half of weight? - Nope, because when u slop front at 60 grad u make it 2 times longer. It will weight the same 2.34 tons.

 

[Chak Bamu]

Lets suppose that hulls front area is 3 m2. You want to protect it with 100 mm armor. When unsloped it will weight 3*0.1*7800=2.34 t.

Now u take 50 mm armor with 60 grad slop. It will have the same 100 mm LOS thickness. But did u save half of weight? - Nope, because when u slop front at 60 grad u make it 2 times longer. It will weight the same 2.34 tons.

Aah... but with sloping, one gets to cover a lot more space - notice the shape 'L' and '\'. L weighs more than the other, while covering similar space.

Does deflection from sloped armor matter much at all?

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Most of Russian tank losses were due to German 88 mm flak guns. T-34 was superior to German tanks until Panther came along in 1943 which adopted T-34's sloped armor which is extremely effective.

Until 1942, when the Tiger appeared.