Featured Egypt reportedly signed contract for 500 T-90MS main battle tanks

[Gomig-21]

Because the U.S. gives Egypt about $1.5B in foreign aid each year (second only to Israel) and the original deal was negotiated to keep Egypt from arming with Russian weapons. The U.S. is selling UAE F-35s, and Saudi Arabia is probably next - it’s difficult to justify selling your most advanced weapon to a subsidy recipient who’s paying you with your own money before real paying customers.

Except the US made it a condition through the Camp David Accords and the peace treaty that the military aid would be guaranteed under a non-belligerence status and maintaining the peace treaty.

The US doesn't seem to have any qualms about donating $3.2 billion in military aid to Israel, more than double what Egypt gets so then why should less than half of that amount to Egypt be an issue?

BTW, that's only what is listed under the peace agreement but in reality, because of joint military projects and licensing to create supplementary products to existing US equipment as well as a budget to perform their own R&D, Israel actually receives a heck of a lot more than that $3.2 billion per year. The actual figure is not published but from what experts have guessed, it's staggering!

Another example that is even crazier is the recent Biden package for Ukraine which is proposed at $32 billion!!! That's almost 30 years of military aid to Egypt in one shot yet no one except for a few conservatives seem to be complaining about it. So why is it difficult to supply Egypt when these other examples far exceed what she's getting compared to those "real paying customers"?

So you can understand why it would piss us off a little bit when we seem to get singled out for the aid that was part of a major agreement the US decided on and offered in the first place, then get criticized or called out for it. Not saying that's what you did, just pointing it out in general because there seems to be a severe bias without understanding the context and the details.

I just wish to point out that if anyone looks at the K2 and say”. That looks like an Abrams” technically it is. General Motors dynamics sold I think there XM1 prototype or K1/K1A1tanks in 80s to Korea so that they could make their indigenous MbT.

Interesting. It does appear like the chassis and hull is almost identical, but they designed the turret to look quite differently. Here's another example of the US giving huge leeways to allies who don't get challenged or called out for it. Korea is a huge recipient of US generosity including the US fighting a major was and suffering huge casualties in 1953.

Looking at the K2.

Hey does the umbrella come as standard equipment? What a great idea and perfect for our harsh, desert environment! Love it.

It actually weighs approximately the same as the Abrams at roughly 60 tons. This is what seems to be more appealing to the Egyptian Armed forces in the T-90MS coming in at roughly 40 tons because now it becomes a much less weight burden on the Mistrals' displacement. They can load up more T-90MS' and achieve the same weight and resulting displacement of the LHD as the lesser number of Abram tanks that would meet the maximum allowable weight.

I really hope that ERA combined with the ARENA APS helps protect that ever so vulnerable area right there between where the turret ERA ends and the top of the hull begins and you can see the circular spinning track for the turret where it's been getting blown off and tossed 500 feet away in the Russian T-72s in Ukraine. Granted those don't have the adequate ERA and also have a very defective design with the storage of amo and the auto-loader that leaves the rounds exposed to get cooked off once that Javelin round penetrate the hull and makes contact with that amo. Waaay too much of that happening in the Ukraine I'm sure the Egyptian generals in charge of this deal have taken notice of that.

Although there is local talk in papers and on TV about how and what is the Egyptian military thinking at this point.

1) They want to upgrade the M1A1 Abrams to the M1A2 (???)
2) Then they also are interested in the K2 Black Panther? Why?
Is it going to add to the Abrams count or what is their plan for
the placement of that tank? Is it replacing the A60M3s? Egypt has close to 1700 M60A3s that have a lot of life left in them with beneficial upgrades. Not sure where they're thinking that K2 fits.
3) The T-90 and the M1A2 upgrade are the two that make the most sense. If the K2 is planned to replace the M60s, I suppose that is also a good idea and might not be that costly in the end, provided the Abrams upgrade is free.

 

[Oldman1]

no enemy crosseed into israels heartland during these wars, now its more than likely if another war breaks out

through airliners to europe

Not enough planes. And what happens if the airports get bombed?

 

[Hydration]

Not enough planes. And what happens if the airports get bombed?

Boats but i doubt civillian airports will be destroyed on the first days of a war

 

[Mahabahu kaunteya]

It's kind of high & low combination they have M1A1 too local assembly now Russian equipment is just flowing Inn with decent numbers

What ever they have got , they are not going to fight the israeli any time soon.
I fear for the Indian army tanks though.

 

[Ghostkiller]

Except the US made it a condition through the Camp David Accords and the peace treaty that the military aid would be guaranteed under a non-belligerence status and maintaining the peace treaty.

The US doesn't seem to have any qualms about donating $3.2 billion in military aid to Israel, more than double what Egypt gets so then why should less than half of that amount to Egypt be an issue?

BTW, that's only what is listed under the peace agreement but in reality, because of joint military projects and licensing to create supplementary products to existing US equipment as well as a budget to perform their own R&D, Israel actually receives a heck of a lot more than that $3.2 billion per year. The actual figure is not published but from what experts have guessed, it's staggering!

Another example that is even crazier is the recent Biden package for Ukraine which is proposed at $32 billion!!! That's almost 30 years of military aid to Egypt in one shot yet no one except for a few conservatives seem to be complaining about it. So why is it difficult to supply Egypt when these other examples far exceed what she's getting compared to those "real paying customers"?

So you can understand why it would piss us off a little bit when we seem to get singled out for the aid that was part of a major agreement the US decided on and offered in the first place, then get criticized or called out for it. Not saying that's what you did, just pointing it out in general because there seems to be a severe bias without understanding the context and the details.



Interesting. It does appear like the chassis and hull is almost identical, but they designed the turret to look quite differently. Here's another example of the US giving huge leeways to allies who don't get challenged or called out for it. Korea is a huge recipient of US generosity including the US fighting a major was and suffering huge casualties in 1953.

Looking at the K2.

View attachment 840658

Hey does the umbrella come as standard equipment? What a great idea and perfect for our harsh, desert environment! Love it.

View attachment 840659

It actually weighs approximately the same as the Abrams at roughly 60 tons. This is what seems to be more appealing to the Egyptian Armed forces in the T-90MS coming in at roughly 40 tons because now it becomes a much less weight burden on the Mistrals' displacement. They can load up more T-90MS' and achieve the same weight and resulting displacement of the LHD as the lesser number of Abram tanks that would meet the maximum allowable weight.

View attachment 840662

View attachment 840663

View attachment 840668

I really hope that ERA combined with the ARENA APS helps protect that ever so vulnerable area right there between where the turret ERA ends and the top of the hull begins and you can see the circular spinning track for the turret where it's been getting blown off and tossed 500 feet away in the Russian T-72s in Ukraine. Granted those don't have the adequate ERA and also have a very defective design with the storage of amo and the auto-loader that leaves the rounds exposed to get cooked off once that Javelin round penetrate the hull and makes contact with that amo. Waaay too much of that happening in the Ukraine I'm sure the Egyptian generals in charge of this deal have taken notice of that.

Although there is local talk in papers and on TV about how and what is the Egyptian military thinking at this point.

1) They want to upgrade the M1A1 Abrams to the M1A2 (???)
2) Then they also are interested in the K2 Black Panther? Why?
Is it going to add to the Abrams count or what is their plan for
the placement of that tank? Is it replacing the A60M3s? Egypt has close to 1700 M60A3s that have a lot of life left in them with beneficial upgrades. Not sure where they're thinking that K2 fits.
3) The T-90 and the M1A2 upgrade are the two that make the most sense. If the K2 is planned to replace the M60s, I suppose that is also a good idea and might not be that costly in the end, provided the Abrams upgrade is free.

I think Egypt will replace the T-55/62 fleet with M-60A1/2/3 and the Abrams will the role of M-60 and K2BP with M1A. But the M1A will be a mix between M60 and K2BP. Ya3ni for instance the M-60 will be in our southern and western border etc..

 

[The SC]

T-90M vs M1A2 SEP V3 - In depth comparison​

 

[LeGenD]

I think comparing the m1a2 SEP to a T-90S is a bit u fair aint it? might maje that the t-90M proyv3 or t-90ms. Although the lower turret peotection hitting tge t-90 small turret is harder than that of the abrams and most kills were preformed from pentrations from the drivers port right under the turret on the upper glacis this is thinnest and least protected and doesnt have era on and is the maine weakness of russian tanks, and illy placed munitions. The abrams logistics wise is just headache in long term operations in lets say a harsh enviroment like an open desert due to its excessive weight harder to transport and is a hungry beast for fuel. Iam still waiting for electric tanks to invade the tank market.
Side note: This egyptian t-90ms deal wasnt even sifned and now evwn harder to sign with the trillions snactions on russia. Russia opted to sell t-90s tanks because it cant sell a higher variant to egypt than to its closest importer india so the deal went bust although they were in very advanced talks and were very serious.

Thanks for your response. You have some valid observations. I feel the need to explain my comparison and highlight some realities.

Production timeline for reference:

Both M1A2 (vanilla) and T-90 (vanilla) were first produced in the 1990s. Both platforms are in service and continue to evolve through the years.

1. M1A2SEP entered service in 1999.

2. T-90A is official designation of T-90 with welded turret. T-90A entered service in 2001.

T-90S is official designation of T-90A approved for exports without Shtora-1 EOCMDAS.

3. M1A2SEPv2 entered service in 2009.

4. T-90M entered service in 2019.

T-90MS is official designation of T-90M approved for exports with reduced capabilities.

5. M1A2CSEPv3 entered service in 2020.

My comparison

My comparison is between baseline armor protection levels of M1A2SEP and enhanced armor protection levels of T-90S with Kontakt-5 ERA; this is rather unfair to American offering.

My comparison shows how Russians are addressing the issue of LACK of baseline armor protection levels in their offerings. Please keep in mind the fact that when an ERA block is struck, replacement is necessary and this is time-consuming activity. Appropriate logistics support should be in vicinity.

T-90M ERA armor improvement

T-90M is offered with Relikt ERA which increases armor protection levels of the host main battle tank (MBT) by up to 20% over Kontakt-5 ERA [vs. Kinetic Energy (KE) rounds] but on par [vs. Chemical Energy (CE) rounds].

M1A2CSEPv3 baseline armor improvement

Americans are also doing their homework.

Baseline armor of M1A2SEPv3 is completely revisited and officially identified as New Evolutionary Armor (NEA). It is considerable even in the bottom bed to withstand powerful explosions from below. Gross weight of M1A2SEPv3 exceeds 80 tons due to this factor.

Baseline armor protection levels of M1A2SEPv3 are very impressive but relevant information is classified. You will find nothing on YouTube and otherwise for now.

TUSK II ERA can also be applied to enhance armor protection levels of M1A2SEP (and later M1 variants), particularly on the sides.

M1A2SEPv3 + TUSK II ERA + Trophy APS = excellent protection levels for urban warfare and otherwise.

Ammo storage vulnerability factor

Yes, Russian offerings are also vulnerable due to ammo storage consideration. This vulnerability is reduced in T-90M with addition of a new armoured bustle with blow out panels to the rear of the turret but cannot be completely addressed due to mechanical requirements of the autoloader system.

Source: Thai Military and Asian Region

This is the case with all MBT designs having an autoloader system including T-14 Armata and Chinese offerings.

In contrast:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1066453147051352064

Manual autoloading practice is best remedy for ammo storage vulnerability factor.

Cost factor

Yes, logistics requirements of (any) heavyweight MBT is greater than that of Russian offerings.

Yes, M1 Abrams (variants) are not cheap to operate. Honeywell AGT1500 gas turbine engine consumes more fuel than its Diesel engine counterparts.

Armies on budget can take cues from Poland and Australia though.

Engine and reliability considerations

Speaking of engines, Honeywell AGT1500 gas turbine engine have its merits as well.

1. Impressive torque and capacity to provide mobility to its host.

2. Much lower acoustics than Diesel engine counterparts.

3. Easy to maintain.

M1A2CSEPv3 is equipped with digital engine management and monitoring system.

Mean Miles Between Combat Mission Failure (MMBCMF) have increased from 320 miles to 441 miles.

M1A2CSEPv3 is also equipped with 10 kW low-profile Under Armor Auxiliary Power Unit (UAAPU) to facilitate "silent watch" in combat situations. This technology reduces fuel consumption by 78% and acoustics by 68% percent in idle phase, and is particularly useful while sniping at enemy positions in nighttime conditions (or camouflaged).

T-90M vs M1A2 SEP V3 - In depth comparison​

See above.

M1A2SEPv3 is much better armored and protected Main Battle Tank (MBT) in comparison. But relevant information is limited in Public domain for now.

T-90M loss also confirmed in Ukraine:

Russia Just Lost Its Most Advanced Operational Tank In Ukraine

The first confirmed loss of Russia's most advanced operational tank is another blow to the Russian Army's eroded image.

www.thedrive.com

 

[Oldman1]

Boats but i doubt civillian airports will be destroyed on the first days of a war

Can't be too sure of that when airports can be used for military operations. Same for ports.

 

[Hydration]

Can't be too sure of that when airports can be used for military operations. Same for ports.

nah israel has alot of airbases.

Thanks for your response. You have some valid observations. I feel the need to explain my comparison and highlight some realities.

Production timeline for reference:

Both M1A2 (vanilla) and T-90 (vanilla) were first produced in the 1990s. Both platforms are in service and continue to evolve through the years.

1. M1A2SEP entered service in 1999.

2. T-90A is official designation of T-90 with welded turret. T-90A entered service in 2001.

T-90S is official designation of T-90A approved for exports without Shtora-1 EOCMDAS.

3. M1A2SEPv2 entered service in 2009.

4. T-90M entered service in 2019.

T-90MS is official designation of T-90M approved for exports with reduced capabilities.

5. M1A2CSEPv3 entered service in 2020.

My comparison

My comparison is between baseline armor protection levels of M1A2SEP and enhanced armor protection levels of T-90S with Kontakt-5 ERA; this is rather unfair to American offering.

My comparison shows how Russians are addressing the issue of LACK of baseline armor protection levels in their offerings. Please keep in mind the fact that when an ERA block is struck, replacement is necessary and this is time-consuming activity. Appropriate logistics support should be in vicinity.

T-90M ERA armor improvement

T-90M is offered with Relikt ERA which increases armor protection levels of the host main battle tank (MBT) by up to 20% over Kontakt-5 ERA [vs. Kinetic Energy (KE) rounds] but on par [vs. Chemical Energy (CE) rounds].

M1A2CSEPv3 baseline armor improvement

Americans are also doing their homework.

Baseline armor of M1A2SEPv3 is completely revisited and officially identified as New Evolutionary Armor (NEA). It is considerable even in the bottom bed to withstand powerful explosions from below. Gross weight of M1A2SEPv3 exceeds 80 tons due to this factor.

Baseline armor protection levels of M1A2SEPv3 are very impressive but relevant information is classified. You will find nothing on YouTube and otherwise for now.

TUSK II ERA can also be applied to enhance armor protection levels of M1A2SEP (and later M1 variants), particularly on the sides.

M1A2SEPv3 + TUSK II ERA + Trophy APS = excellent protection levels for urban warfare and otherwise.

Ammo storage vulnerability factor

Yes, Russian offerings are also vulnerable due to ammo storage consideration. This vulnerability is reduced in T-90M with addition of a new armoured bustle with blow out panels to the rear of the turret but cannot be completely addressed due to mechanical requirements of the autoloader system.

Source: Thai Military and Asian Region

This is the case with all MBT designs having an autoloader system including T-14 Armata and Chinese offerings.

In contrast:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1066453147051352064

Manual autoloading practice is best remedy for ammo storage vulnerability factor.

Cost factor

Yes, logistics requirements of (any) heavyweight MBT is greater than that of Russian offerings.

Yes, M1 Abrams (variants) are not cheap to operate. Honeywell AGT1500 gas turbine engine consumes more fuel than its Diesel engine counterparts.

Armies on budget can take cues from Poland and Australia though.

Engine and reliability considerations

Speaking of engines, Honeywell AGT1500 gas turbine engine have its merits as well.

1. Impressive torque and capacity to provide mobility to its host.

2. Much lower acoustics than Diesel engine counterparts.

3. Easy to maintain.

M1A2CSEPv3 is equipped with digital engine management and monitoring system.

Mean Miles Between Combat Mission Failure (MMBCMF) have increased from 320 miles to 441 miles.

M1A2CSEPv3 is also equipped with 10 kW low-profile Under Armor Auxiliary Power Unit (UAAPU) to facilitate "silent watch" in combat situations. This technology reduces fuel consumption by 78% and acoustics by 68% percent in idle phase, and is particularly useful while sniping at enemy positions in nighttime conditions (or camouflaged).



See above.

M1A2SEPv3 is much better armored and protected Main Battle Tank (MBT) in comparison. But relevant information is limited in Public domain for now.

T-90M loss also confirmed in Ukraine:

Russia Just Lost Its Most Advanced Operational Tank In Ukraine

The first confirmed loss of Russia's most advanced operational tank is another blow to the Russian Army's eroded image.

www.thedrive.com

i wil always wonder how is that armour info public either inflated or minimized, you make goodpoints

 

[Oldman1]

nah israel has alot of airbases.

Yeah but there are lots of missiles and only small real estate for Israel. Unlike Ukraine where its too big to be targeted hence why Ukrainian Air Force is still flying.

 

[Hydration]

Yeah but there are lots of missiles and only small real estate for Israel. Unlike Ukraine where its too big to be targeted hence why Ukrainian Air Force is still flying.

we will leave that question for the next war. stay tuned maybe this decade

 

[Oldman1]

we will leave that question for the next war. stay tuned maybe this decade

Its more common sense then leaving that question for the next war.

 

[Beny Karachun]

Yeah but there are lots of missiles and only small real estate for Israel. Unlike Ukraine where its too big to be targeted hence why Ukrainian Air Force is still flying.

Lol, we were even smaller in the past, with way smaller air force, at a technological disadvantage, yet no one was able to destroy our air force.

Israel has the most protected air space in this world, and it's capable of reacting faster than anyone else to any attack, and will most likely know of any incoming attack and will prevent it. Next year laser systems will be deployed to protect Israel.

If you think anyone can wage a conventional war against Israel and not have at least a bloody nose as a result you're delusional.

 

[Hydration]

Lol, we were even smaller in the past, with way smaller air force, at a technological disadvantage, yet no one was able to destroy our air force.

Israel has the most protected air space in this world, and it's capable of reacting faster than anyone else to any attack, and will most likely know of any incoming attack and will prevent it. Next year laser systems will be deployed to protect Israel.

If you think anyone can wage a conventional war against Israel and not have at least a bloody nose as a result you're delusional.

next time try protecting yourself from hamas tin darts
And no you DID NOT have a technological disadvantge but weapons that werent even into service in the us army itself like mavericks, infact you had the most advanced weapons in the world, still lost too bad

 

[Beny Karachun]

next time try protecting yourself from hamas tin darts
And no you DID NOT have a technological disadvantge but weapons that werent even into service in the us army itself like mavericks, infact you had the most advanced weapons in the world, still lost too bad

Cope harder, there's a reason everyone is interested in the Iron Dome.

Pathetic, Israel won, everyone knows that, only ones that dispute it are butthurt Muslims with a fragile ego.

Mavericks had little to no effect in the war, and were brought very lately into the 1973 war.