T-90 in Comparison to Western Armour

[Waylander]

As these tests were supposedly done in Germany one also has to wonder about the lack of German rounds getting tested.
One would assume that at least DM33 gets tested if the chance arises.

I only know of Tests against ex-NVA Ts about which we were briefed.

 

[Waylander]

We talked about this text some time ago here and it showed that it is a fake as there is no such article in the original.

 

[Waylander]

Sorry, but what? Do you want a link to the mentioned threat? There are better ways to ask for this than one word.

I am sorry but I can't give you the link. It may very well be hidden in the depth of the more than sixty pages of this threat. I just remembered that we had this article here before and thougt that it might be usefull to share my memories...

 

[Waylander]

Do you have a special problem with me or with what I am writing here?
You have been here for five minutes and you already start to step on my toes?

Why is that? I merely added that we had this article here on Defencetalk before. Than I added the conclusion of the discussion.

So try to act and discuss in a civilized manner or stay away from the discussion.

 

[webmaster]

IronInSightSniper,

The article you posted was posted earlier and discussed, please search before reposting same material and for what? What do you want to discuss about that article? What premise for the topic, if any, do you want to establish by quoting that article?

http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/a...comparison-western-armour-5288-45/#post129339

 

[Waylander]

Thanks for the find WebMaster! I knew we had it here some time ago.

 

[IronsightSniper]

[Mod edit: Text deleted. Note that two defence professionals, two Mods and the Webmaster were interacting with you. They were offering additional information for what initially seemed to be a request for more information. But evidently, from your responses, you are trolling.

The Mod team has given you sufficient benefit of the doubt. You are hereby banned for 2 weeks and warned against further trolling upon your return. Based on the history of your posts in this thread (including posting a fake Jane's article and your attempt to insinuate that the article you posted is authentic), you are hereby instructed to read the Forum Rules before posting again.]

 

[eckherl]

[Mod edit: Text deleted.]

All I will state to you is that at certain ranges this could of been the case with older generation KE projectiles. This is not the case with newer projectiles in regards to K 5 or K 6, you can thank the Ukrainians and certain Russian engineers for this.

 

[jois]

i had this great opportunity to go through this thread and it is really heart warming to see such depth in most posts here.

i don't know if i am OT here but can somebody give me specs relating to V92S2 engine (1000hp) in the T-90S? may be a OEM link?

thanks in advance.

 

[AMERICANMAN]

Really? Blimey! I am impressed by your vast knowledge of armour technology!

T-34? T-64 mean anythng to you?

Thought not.......

Marsh

[Mod Edit: Text deleted. Another attempt at trolling.]

Russia Tells Local Firms: Buy German Vehicle Armor
By NABI ABDULLAEV
Published: 3 May 2010 Print | EmailMOSCOW - Russia's defense ministry is pushing domestic companies that build military vehicles to get the armor from Germany, Russian Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov said April 21.

"We will not buy Russian automobiles and armored vehicles the way they are," Serdyukov said at a meeting with representatives of advocacy organizations that support troops and veterans.

The minister said Russian armor provides poor protection for soldiers inside the vehicles, so the ministry has forced KamAZ, Russia's biggest truck-maker, and other companies to start talking to Germany's Rheinmetall Defence and other foreign firms."
Russia Tells Local Firms: Buy German Vehicle Armor - Defense News

 

[IronsightSniper]

Interesting...you'd think that a T-90 that survived 7 hits from a RPG would win some praise and get some funding to be installed with some ARENAs. But, the T-90 is only an intermediary solution anyways, even though the T-95 and Black Eagle have both been cancelled, I still think Russia has a direction in regards to their armor.

 

[STURM]

Most if not all T-90s in Russian service as seen from photos are fitted Shotra. Have any been fitted with both Shotra and Arena?

 

[IronsightSniper]

From what I know, none. Although, a T-72 was demonstrated with ARENA at an Expo. There should be no reason why a T-90 can't be fitted with the same.

 

[STURM]

From what I know, none. Although, a T-72 was demonstrated with ARENA at an Expo. There should be no reason why a T-90 can't be fitted with the same.

Yes but was the T-72 in question atually operated by the Russian army ans was Arena a standard fit or installed purely for maketing purposes? I think the main reason very few or maybe no T-90s are fitted with both Arena and Shotra is because of funding issues. There may also be other issues involved with Shotra being reported as being very power hungry. For operators of non-Russian manufactured T-72 and derivates such as the
PT-91, I've read somewhere that the Russians have refused to sell any equipment to be fitted on these MBTs as they view the export of these MBTs by countries like Poland and the Czech Republic, etc, as a violation of the licensing agreement signed during the days of the Soviet Union.

 

[IronsightSniper]

From whatever sources Wikipedia uses, apparently Arena has not been used standaredly equipped for tactical purposes, all the times that it has been equipped, were for marketting purposes.

 

[eckherl]

Most if not all T-90s in Russian service as seen from photos are fitted Shotra. Have any been fitted with both Shotra and Arena?

The answer to your question is yes, for testing purposes, they are still having some issues with Arena that need to be ironed out.

 

[STURM]

Something I'm also very curious about.

1. Do Russian army T-90's have a commanders paranomic sight with 360 degrees coverage to provide a 'hunter killer' ability and do both the gunner and commander have a thermal?

2. Can the pintle mounted MG be fired from inside the turret?

 

[IronsightSniper]

Something I'm also very curious about.

1. Do Russian army T-90's have a commanders paranomic sight with 360 degrees coverage to provide a 'hunter killer' ability and do both the gunner and commander have a thermal?

2. Can the pintle mounted MG be fired from inside the turret?

1. Actually, I do not know if the T-90 does or does not have a panoramic sight w/ 360 coverage. However, I do know that the Commander, Gunner, and Driver all have Day/Night viewing systems.

2. Yes, the T-90 does have a remotely controlled heavy machine gun.

 

[STURM]

Interesting excerpts from a now defunct blog - Trishul, regarding the T-90.

''In hunter-killer fire-control systems as those on board the Merkava-4, Challenger 2, M-1A2 Abrams, Leopard 2A6 and the Leclerc, it is the commander's panoramic sight that is responsoble for target acquisition, target tracking and target designation. Only after the MBT commander completes these three tasks is the engagement phase undertaken by the gunner. In other words, while the commander's sight does three separate but sequential functions, the gunner's sight performs only one function. While all four processes are smoothly conducted by the Arjun Mk1 MBT's hunter-killer fire-control system, this is not the case with the upgraded T-72M1 CIA and T-90S MBTs for the simple reason that neither of these two MBTs have a panoramic commander's sight (they have a 'semi-panoramic' sight). This in turn prevents the MBT commander from looking around the MBT's periphery searching for targets. Instead, the entire turret has to be traversed (moved around) to look for targets and once they're acquired, the turret stays fixated in the direct of the target so that the fixed gunner's sight can complete the target engagement process.''

''Kindly allow me to be more specific. The T-90S brochure from Uralvagonzavod states that the commander's sight offers a "semi-panoramic view of the terrain through sight by the commander". In addition, a quick glance of the T-90S MBT's photo clearly shows the limited independent traverse of the commander's sight (burdened as it is by the anti-aircraft gun. Consequently, the sight cannnot be rotated 360 degrees, unlike a panoramic sight that can be. Secondly, to say that a replacement commander's panoramic sight be retrofitted within the T-90S as a simple 'drop-in installation' without any kind of structural/electrical modifications is, to say the least, oversimplifying the challenges involved in carry out such retrofits. Had you taken a first-hand look inside the turret and spoken to personnel from the Russian Army's Armoured Warfare Directorate (who usually accompany Uralvagonzavod JSC marketing officials in defence expos around the world), you would not have undulged in such oversimplifications. ''

''FYI I've come across several technical documentations on the T-80, T-84 and T-90 MBTs brought out since the 1990s by Oboronexport, Promexport, Rosvoorouzhenie and now Rosoboronexport, and NOT ONE of them has ever used terms like 'hunter-killer fire-control system' or 'hit-survivable' MBT design features when describing the design/performance characteristics of MBTs of Soviet/Russian origin. I wonder why, since such terms are explained in great detail when it comes to similar literature emanating from MBT manufacturers of non-Soviet/Russian origin. ''

''There are a number of reasons why the radical modification of the T-90S (mind you, not the latest T-90M which the Army is also acquiring), especially the turret interior, could well be impossible. The foremost challenge lies in having adequate space for accommodating a panoramic commander's sight (with its built-in thermal imager) along with the battlespace management system, and then doing the impossible: catering to the extra battery power reqmts (by figuring out how exactly to accommodate such batteries and where) andinstalling the related wiring and harnesses. In fact, this was the most difficult issue to solve when it came to fitting the THALES-supplied Catherine-FC thermal imagers as part of the gunner's sight. Therefore, unless the turret volume of the T-90S is increased (like what has been done with the T-90M), the installation of a functional commander's panoramic sight in an existing T-90S is a VERY BAD & UNACHIEVABLE IDEA.''

''India's refusal to acquire the Shtora was primarily due to the system's demonstrated ineffectiveness under Indian operating conditions, however, in its place the IDAS is being acquired as the integrated defensive aids suite.
Lastly, regarding the issue of hit-survivability, I'm of the firm belief that post-World War-II MBT designs emanating from the Soviet Union (and now Russia) have been fundamentally flawed. The sheer numbers of T-72Ms, T-80s and T-90s destroyed in combat since the late 1960s in the Middle East and the Caucasus is testimony to the ineffectiveness of the hit-survivability features of Soviet/Russian MBTs. I'm afraid I can't agree with the MBT writeoff figures (suffered in combat) that have been exhaustively documented globally. I totally agree with you that even more can be done, and I am sure the right lessons will be applied to the FMBT that will in future emerge from Uralvagonzavod JSC''

 

[IronsightSniper]

Heh, I do agree the T-90 is not the best tank that it can be, as it's only a hyper modified T-72 and only an intermediary MBT for when the T-95(now cancelled) and Black Eagle(again cancelled) comes out.