Discussion: will Egypt replace its old T-55 and T-62 with the T-90MS

[The SC]

Sources from well-informed Egyptian military pages talk about the T-90ms tank deal for Egypt soon with the possibility of local manufacturing..

It is likely that the destination for a large batch of T-90MS will be Egypt - another country that traditionally buy weapons from Russia and related to Africa only geographically..

The first batch to be from Russia, and the contract of production is for 400 - 500 tanks after readying the production line of the tank ..

And for the first time manufacturing an active protection system in Egypt.
https://rns.online/…/Kontrakt-na-postavku-tankov-T-90MS-na
https://rns.online/…/Kontrakt-na-postavku-tankov-T-90MS-na


I think if the replacement of the old fleet is a good option, this version got very broad and distinctive adjustments and will be a real force multiplier for Egypt..especially since it is a light weight MBT that can fit on the Mistral.. and the price is right..

And versus the Abrams without active protection and without the possibility of launching an anti-armour missile from the old cannon L44 and an armour shield that is inferior to the US and Israel tanks, and can hit the target only at 4 km and with its very large thermal signature.. this was reduced somehow, but remain high against an enemy focused on Anti-thermal missiles!

What will The T-90MS add to the Egyptian army Tank forces?

- Arena Active Protection System (APS)

- The possibility of launching an anti-tank missile from its cannons with a range of 6 km

- 125 mm cannon is very powerful

- Shields lightweight and small in size but very powerful and effective

- Excellent thermal and radar fingerprint, high speed, uncompromising maneuverability.

 

[YeBeWarned]

T-90 Performance in Syria is not that bad , i think Egypt should go for it to replace old tanks . maybe they can test Oplot and T-99A from China ..

 

[Frogman]

Mo M1s less problems yo

 

[mekawy]

i prefer to wait for armata & i think we wont but t90s

 

[The SC]

i prefer to wait for armata & i think we wont but t90s

Need to wait at least 10 years (because the Russian requirement for the Armata are very big), which will come after the end of production of a 1000 or so T-90MS in Egypt.. so one should expect the arrival of the Armata by that time..

T-90 Performance in Syria is not that bad , i think Egypt should go for it to replace old tanks . maybe they can test Oplot and T-99A from China ..

Imagine, these come with local production and ToT and proven in combat where they performed very well against the TOW and other new ATGMs..

Mo M1s less problems yo

"the Abrams without active protection and without the possibility of launching an anti-armour missile from the old cannon L44 and an armour shield that is inferior to the US and Israel tanks, and can hit the target only at 4 km and with its very large thermal signature.. this was reduced somehow, but remains high against an enemy focused on Anti-thermal missiles!"
These are real problems with M1s considering what potential adversaries are fielding right now..

 

[Frogman]

the Abrams without active protection

Why would an Egyptian Abrams/MBT need an active protection system?

Egyptian armour is still very much focused on a future cross border conventional conflict where the biggest tank killers are tanks themselves, artillery, and fast air. APS can do nothing here and if anything is a draw back given it emits RF that an enemy with sophisticated ES capabilities can locate. Not a cost effective system yet to roll out on a massive scale either.

Notice that the only tanks deployed on Op Sinai have been M60s and for that specific purpose a small Urgent Operational Requirement procurement can be made, even that role needn't necessarily filled with a tank as in Mech Divisions they're primarily there for fire support.

without the possibility of launching an anti-armour missile

Again why do you need it?

Tanks with ATGMs are usually compensating for several drawbacks and in doing so sacrificing some capabilities while gaining others.

What they're compensating for:

- Short effective main armament range
- Inability to depress the main armament sufficiently for reverse-slope hull down positioning
- Poor armour penetration using conventional ammunition

What they're gaining:

- Defeating heavily protected high value targets like fortified positions or dug in MBTs ("Bunker busting")
- Long range precision shooting from beyond the effective range of enemy tank counter-fire
- Defensive fire from hull down positions

What they're sacrificing:

- They will carry less conventional ammunition (Abrams 42 rounds vs T 90 22 rounds)
- ATGM significantly slower leaving tank vulnerable to counter fire
- Tank will have to stay static whilst firing ATGM again making it vulnerable
- they cost more than conventional shells

Contemporary Western tanks are yet to adopt ATGMs because they have little need to while Russian (or Russian "inspired") tanks did. They were facing the prospect of dug in NATO tanks if they decided to roll over the border and it was a capability that they had an operational need for considering Gronzy, Ossettia, and now the Ukraine and Syria.

Egypt does not have the same operational needs as them.

armour shield that is inferior to the US and Israel tanks

Yet still superior or on par to everything else out there. I would also contest the claim of Israeli armour being "better". Their capability is certainly over egged.

Even the Iraqi Abrams has showed it's a tough SOB!

Look for and read the Merkava articles on this: http://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.co.uk/2017/

large thermal signature..against an enemy focused on Anti-thermal missiles

It's a tank like any other and no one has of yet come close to developing a technology that will hide its thermal signature. However, the shortcomings of the engine in that area are made up with its unrivaled performance in terms of torque, acceleration, and the overall maneuverability it gives the Abrams (which is better than a bloody T-90).

These are real problems with M1s considering what potential adversaries are fielding right now..

Very real problems that the US has no qualms about kicking its service life way down the field? There has been no significant capability jump that suddenly makes the Abrams noncompetitive.

Why order more than a thousand other tanks to replace the M60?

- We build them in Factory 200
- We overhaul and repair them in Factory 200
- We manufacture the ammunition
- We have the logistics to support them
- We have the M88 Recovery vehicle
- We already train people on them
- We already use over one thousand of them
- We already know they can share information with other US/NATO platforms
- We already know they're inter-operable with our allies
- We know that getting more would be cost effective

Why in all that is holy would we shoot ourselves in the foot and not consolidate on the above by ordering an inferior tank!?

 

[Super Falcon]

Sisi is a puppet of USA I don't see he but Russian tanks

 

[Amun]

I believe that it will be more cost effective to upgrade M1A1 tanks to M1A2 and increasing the Kits built in Egypt also inter in another program for M1A2 manufacturing with increasing the Domestic manufacturer % , that will be good waiting the NG Tanks after 10 -15 years.

 

[masud]

T-90 = NO.
T-14 = YES.

 

[The SC]

Why would an Egyptian Abrams/MBT need an active protection system?

Egyptian armour is still very much focused on a future cross border conventional conflict where the biggest tank killers are tanks themselves, artillery, and fast air. APS can do nothing here and if anything is a draw back given it emits RF that an enemy with sophisticated ES capabilities can locate. Not a cost effective system yet to roll out on a massive scale either.

Notice that the only tanks deployed on Op Sinai have been M60s and for that specific purpose a small Urgent Operational Requirement procurement can be made, even that role needn't necessarily filled with a tank as in Mech Divisions they're primarily there for fire support.



Again why do you need it?

Tanks with ATGMs are usually compensating for several drawbacks and in doing so sacrificing some capabilities while gaining others.

What they're compensating for:

- Short effective main armament range
- Inability to depress the main armament sufficiently for reverse-slope hull down positioning
- Poor armour penetration using conventional ammunition

What they're gaining:

- Defeating heavily protected high value targets like fortified positions or dug in MBTs ("Bunker busting")
- Long range precision shooting from beyond the effective range of enemy tank counter-fire
- Defensive fire from hull down positions

What they're sacrificing:

- They will carry less conventional ammunition (Abrams 42 rounds vs T 90 22 rounds)
- ATGM significantly slower leaving tank vulnerable to counter fire
- Tank will have to stay static whilst firing ATGM again making it vulnerable
- they cost more than conventional shells

Contemporary Western tanks are yet to adopt ATGMs because they have little need to while Russian (or Russian "inspired") tanks did. They were facing the prospect of dug in NATO tanks if they decided to roll over the border and it was a capability that they had an operational need for considering Gronzy, Ossettia, and now the Ukraine and Syria.

Egypt does not have the same operational needs as them.



Yet still superior or on par to everything else out there. I would also contest the claim of Israeli armour being "better". Their capability is certainly over egged.

Even the Iraqi Abrams has showed it's a tough SOB!

Look for and read the Merkava articles on this: http://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.co.uk/2017/



It's a tank like any other and no one has of yet come close to developing a technology that will hide its thermal signature. However, the shortcomings of the engine in that area are made up with its unrivaled performance in terms of torque, acceleration, and the overall maneuverability it gives the Abrams (which is better than a bloody T-90).



Very real problems that the US has no qualms about kicking its service life way down the field? There has been no significant capability jump that suddenly makes the Abrams noncompetitive.

Why order more than a thousand other tanks to replace the M60?

- We build them in Factory 200
- We overhaul and repair them in Factory 200
- We manufacture the ammunition
- We have the logistics to support them
- We have the M88 Recovery vehicle
- We already train people on them
- We already use over one thousand of them
- We already know they can share information with other US/NATO platforms
- We already know they're inter-operable with our allies
- We know that getting more would be cost effective

Why in all that is holy would we shoot ourselves in the foot and not consolidate on the above by ordering an inferior tank!?

I have explained what the T-90MS will add to the Abrams.. and the American Tanks are too heavy for the mistral.. I appreciate your facts and opinion, but as we all know the situation might change as well as circumstances.. The T-90 is affordable on top of being a good Tank, the M-60 s will need replacement too and that will be done with other American Tanks either more advanced versions of the Abrams or a completely new US Tank..

 

[MICA]

What will The T-90MS add to the Egyptian army Tank forces?

- Arena Active Protection System

The MS version lacks aps

I have explained what the T-90MS will add to the Abrams.. and the American Tanks are too heavy for the mistral

It can carry both in same numbers

 

[HannibalBarca]

Lol... it's like letting down your one of a kind of a Mustang for a new Camarro... just bc it has A/C and a good looking onboard screen...

 

[The SC]

The MS version lacks aps


It can carry both in same numbers

"And for the first time manufacturing an active protection system in Egypt"..

That is left to be seen.. the Abrams are just too heavy for a rapid force deployment carried by the Mistral..

Anyway, they are talking about a 400-500T-90MS deal for now with the possibility of local manufacture.. it is always good to diversify its weapon sources..

 

[gati11]

now they have more dollar reserves they can afford themselfs

 

[Ilay]

I personally view the T-90 MS as another ugly b!ich with tons of make up to make it look more apealing to costumers, eastern armour still hasn't caught up to its westren counterpart's level of quality and as an ex-tanker i'd sugget to the one that is the head of military procurment of the Egyptian armour corps to take a look at the latest version of the Abrams tank - the SEP. V3 by GD the only tank that could probably match my own Merkava MK. 4.