Russia’s T-90 tank - winner or loser?

[Keshav Murali]

SOunds to me it only has a different recoilsystem, just like the US version has a different recoil system.

See Wiki, military today and others. The Israelis say that their MG251 and MG253 are their own design.

 

[Keshav Murali]

Check completely redesigned turret with angular arrowshaped armour on the t-90ms.The armour is modular composite with outer layer being KAKTUS K-6 latest ERA.
Now Considering russia also operates around 1000 t-90 don't see how its a loser.Especially alos since other countries have imported it too except india.

Relikt was better. Kaktus has been shelved. And Indian T-90S uses K-5 while T-90MS uses Relikt.

The turret protection of the T-90 is estimated at over 900mm against Sabot rounds. The T-90 has been hit with Western M829A2 120mm rounds, and supposedly one tank sustained 7RPG hits in combat, neither time was the tank penetrated.

No. Turret naked is estimated at 550-600 mm, and Relikt is supposed to add 200-250 mm of protection.

 

[Keshav Murali]

----------Double Post------------

 

[IND151]

Proof that Ob'yekt 195 is not too big:

From Otvaga forum

Slightly underestimated gun length, height is correct. But other than that, the picture is accurate, Ob'yekt 195 has similar length to Western tanks, height is more because of massive turret (even if unmanned) and huge mantlet that is required for 2A83. Fume extractor is absent on the gun.

Also, RCWS, hatches are missing due to lack of information

Also, Ob'yekt 195 and Armata both have been opened for export for main "strategic partner" who has many "Joint venture" according to interview of Russian tank designing bureau's head. Surprise surprise, only country with Joint Ventures with Russia even now is India.

I want some Ob'yekt 195 for the garage in my house

@alimobin memon @DARKY @AUSTERLITZ

Your valued opinions on the T-90AM and Ob'yekt 195 and Armata.

I beleive T 99 will have 14 wheels not 12.

The tank has to be larger if it has to be fitted with more equipment and security measures.

 

[IND151]

This is not armata design at all,armatas hull would be much longer than turret as turret is unmanned and hull has crew in armoured capsule.

That was the case with T-95 whcih is cancelled.

The T 99 will be simpler, cheaper according to sources, whcih is another way of telling that it wont have unmanned turret but will be adavcned compared to T 90.

But I believe in any case it will have 14 wheels, as tank's length wil increase.

@Oscar

 

[AUz]

T-90 is inferior to basic Al Khalid. But still a good tank.

 

[The Unnamed]

it's not an urban tank.

it would need to be judged against what is it up against..air support, blah blah blah..

it is enough to blow IS *** till thy kingdom come if that's a good enough comparison. in good hands of course.

 

[Penguin]

it's not an urban tank.

it would need to be judged against what is it up against..air support, blah blah blah..

it is enough to blow IS *** till thy kingdom come if that's a good enough comparison. in good hands of course.

wtf is that?!@!>?!

 

[The Unnamed]

wtf is that?!@!>?!

it might be very vernerable in an urban area, i think fighting in a city isn't what the t90 designers had in mind. what i mean is like, how the t90 would work in a situation when it would have to engage held up enemy within a built up area. i don't think it would do well..i maybe wrong on that account based on specifics, but yeah i think it will not do very well..

 

[The Huskar]

T-90 is inferior to basic Al Khalid. But still a good tank.

And how did you arrive to this conclusion?

 

[Penguin]

it might be very vernerable in an urban area, i think fighting in a city isn't what the t90 designers had in mind. what i mean is like, how the t90 would work in a situation when it would have to engage held up enemy within a built up area. i don't think it would do well..i maybe wrong on that account based on specifics, but yeah i think it will not do very well..

Tanks are neither designed nor particularly intended for urban combat. Irrespective of make and type.

 

[Etilla]

The t-80 and been confused with the t-90.

T-80 failed as an urban tank in Chechnya (Grozny) and in the 2nd war the T-90 proved to be remarkable.

Thats why T-80 is considered obsolete by Russian Army and is being replaced by T-72 which is on the battlefield superior to T-80 despite T-80 having superior specifications on paper.

 

[Penguin]

T-90 is inferior to basic Al Khalid. But still a good tank.

Which T-90 exactly are we talking about / comparing with?

T-90 - The first production version.
T-90E - Export version of T-90 MBT.
T-90A 'Vladimir' - Russian army version with welded turret, V-92S2 engine and ESSA thermal viewer.
T-90S - Export version of the T-90A, updated with 1,000 hp (750 kW) engines These tanks however do not feature the Shtora-1 passive/active protection system. Sometimes called T-90C
T-90AM - Latest version of the T-90A. Includes modernization of the old turret design, new advanced fcs "Kalina" (with integrated combat information and control systems), a new automatic loader and a new upgraded gun 2A46M-5, as well as a remote-controlled anti-aircraft gun "UDP T05BV-1". The new version also includes the Relikt ERA bricks instead of Kontak-5 ERA bricks. New 1130HP engine, an enhanced environmental control system and satellite navigation systems.
T-90SM - Modernized (M) version of the export tank T-90S, with a 1130HP engine, a PNM Sosna-U gunner view, a 7.62mm turret UDP T05BV-1 RWS, GLONASS, inertial navigation systems and new ERA. A new removable turret bustle is included, which holds provides storage for eight additional rounds.

 

[Penguin]

T-80 failed as an urban tank in Chechnya (Grozny)

Thats why T-80 is considered obsolete by Russian Army and is being replaced by T-72 which is on the battlefield superior to T-80 despite T-80 having superior specifications on paper.

Actually , no.

Sixty-two tanks were destroyed in the first month's fighting in Chechnya. Over 98% (apparently 61 tanks) were knocked out by rounds which impacted in areas not protected by reactive armor. The Russians employed the T-72 and T-80 tank in Chechnya. They were both invulnerable to frontal shots, since the front is heavily armored and covered with reactive armor. Kill shots were made at those points where there is no reactive armor--the sides and rear and, on top shots, on the drivers hatch and the rear of the turret and rear deck. Early in the conflict, most Russian tanks went into combat without their reactive armor. They were particularly vulnerable to damaging or lethal frontal hits without it

Foreign Military Studies Office Publications - Russian-Manufactured Armored Vehicle Vulnerability in Urban Combat: The Chechnya Experience

Russian T-80s:
3,144 in active service and around 1,856 in storage in 1995.
3,500 in active service in 1998.
3,058 in active service and 1,442 in stock in 2000.
4,500 in both active service and storage in 2005.
3,044 in active service and 1,456 in storage in 2008
T-80 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hardly a reduction since 1995 .....

The Russian Federation has over 5,000 T-72 tanks in use, including around 2,000 in active service and 3,000 in reserves.
T-72 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Clearly, T-72 is proportionally 'in reserve' to a far greater extent

Russia operates 550 T-90A as of 2013
T-90 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Together with T-72 from which it derived, numbers active are still less than T-80

The T-90 main battle tank, the most modern tank in the army arsenal, went into low-level production in 1993, based on a prototype designated as the T-88. The T-90 was developed by the Kartsev-Venediktov Design Bureau at the Vagonka Works in Nizhniy Tagil. Initially seen as an entirely new design, the production model is in fact based on the T-72BM, with some added features from the T-80 series.

T-90

T-64 Russia
Approx. 4000 in 1995. Russia has approximately 2,000 which it has phased out of service and are slated for destruction.
T-64 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
T-64 was produced solely for the Soviet Army and the slightly less capable T-72 was exported world-wide..
T64 Tank

 

[Etilla]

Actually , no.


Foreign Military Studies Office Publications - Russian-Manufactured Armored Vehicle Vulnerability in Urban Combat: The Chechnya Experience
View attachment 75303 View attachment 75304

T-80 of Russia:
3,144 in active service and around 1,856 in storage in 1995.
3,500 in active service in 1998.
3,058 in active service and 1,442 in stock in 2000.
4,500 in both active service and storage in 2005.
3,044 in active service and 1,456 in storage in 2008
T-80 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hardly a reduction.....

First Chechen War[edit]
T-80B and T-80BV MBTs were never used in Afghanistan in the 1980s, but they were first used during the First Chechen War. This first real combat experience for T-80 MBTs was unsuccessful, as the tanks were used for capturing cities, a task for which they were not very well suited. The biggest tank losses were suffered during the ill-fated assault on the city of Grozny. The forces selected to capture Grozny were not prepared for such an operation, while the city was defended by, among others, veterans of the Soviet War in Afghanistan. The T-80 tanks used in this operation either did not have reactive armour (T-80B) or they were not fitted before the start of the operation (T-80BV), and the T-80 crews lacked sufficient training before the war.

The inexperienced crews had no knowledge of the layout of the city, while the tanks were attacked by RPG teams hidden in cellars and on top of high buildings. The anti-tank fire was directed at the least armoured points of the vehicles. Each destroyed tank received from three to six hits, and each tank was fired at by six or sevenrocket-propelled grenades. A number of vehicles exploded when the autoloader, with vertically placed rounds, was hit: in theory it should have been protected by the road wheel, but, when the tanks got hit on their side armour, the ready-to-use ammunition exploded. Out of all armored vehicles that entered Grozny, 225 were destroyed in the first month alone, representing 10.23% of all the tanks committed to the campaign.[25] The T-80 performed so poorly that General-Lieutenant A. Galkin, the head of the Armor Directorate, convinced the Minister of Defence after the conflict to never again procure tanks with gas-turbine engines.[26] After that, T-80 MBTs were never again used to capture cities, and, instead, they supported infantry squads from a safe distance. Defenders of the T-80 point out that the T-72 performed just as badly in urban fighting in Grozny as the T-80 and that there were two mitigating factors: after the breakup of the Soviet Union, poor funding meant no training for new Russian tank crews, and the tank force entering the city had no infantry support, which is considered to be suicidal by many major military strategists of armored warfare.[24]

From same page.

Russian army is replacing the obsolete T-80 with the battle proven T-72

Actually , no.


Foreign Military Studies Office Publications - Russian-Manufactured Armored Vehicle Vulnerability in Urban Combat: The Chechnya Experience
View attachment 75303 View attachment 75304

Russian T-80s:
3,144 in active service and around 1,856 in storage in 1995.
3,500 in active service in 1998.
3,058 in active service and 1,442 in stock in 2000.
4,500 in both active service and storage in 2005.
3,044 in active service and 1,456 in storage in 2008
T-80 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hardly a reduction since 1995 .....

The Russian Federation has over 5,000 T-72 tanks in use, including around 2,000 in active service and 3,000 in reserves.
T-72 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Clearly, T-72 is proportionally 'in reserve' to a far greater extent

Russia operates 550 T-90A as of 2013
T-90 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Together with T-72 from which it derived, numbers active are still less than T-80

All 4500 T-80 are in storage. None are deployed as it is a battlefield failure.

List of main battle tanks by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia