The tanks are old, at this point mechanically unreliable (large numbers broke down during the war) and simply inferior in combat capabilities when compared to even Georgian T-72Bs. It's embarassing that our country can't afford to replace a tank will soon turn 50 years old.I do not understand why you think that this is embarassing, Russia is quite capable of bring equipment in theater that can match opponent firepower, meaning that they can adjust accordingly.
Russia has plenty of tanks sitting in storage at different military districts, and I did not hear of large amounts of Russian T-62s breaking down. Lets face it, Russian airpower for the most part prevented Georgian armor formations from even moving thus the reason for so many abandoned vehicles.
But still, it was hardly a fair fight it didn't prove much against Russia other than it can quickly mobilize and concert its forces to achieve large scale results. They also didn't use any of their newer fighters or any T-90's on the ground (they don't want foreign speculators judging true Russian military capabilities) so they gave Georgia a small yet overwhelming taste.
You are overly critical of a minor issue imo. Russia could have easily sent in T-90s but knew that it had to be measured in response and also keep its true capabilities tight lipped against what looked like tactical prodding from the West.
There is no such thing as a fair fight, the rule is to win and to win quickly.
In fact, I'll go a step further. I'll be so bold as to say Russia didn't even need any tanks. I agree with the distance as well as previous planning had a lot to do with their rapid mobilization, as well as daily intelligence from Ossetian and Abkhazian seperatists. Now Russia can largely evade tangling with a larger opponent because in actuality, it did compose itself during the conflict and did show discipline and did manage to scare a bunch of nations back into a cold war mentality. This is a type of situation that literally feeds the Kremlin.There is no such thing as a fair fight, the rule is to win and to win quickly.
Agree with you, newer equipment was not needed in this small scale conflict, they could of used T-55s with the same outcome. Also alot of those Russian forces were already not that far away, so I would still question Russian capability for a large scale mobilization if they ever were to tangle with a larger opponent.
Looked at this article and find this:
Either that or large scale serial production of the T-90 is planned. By the way the T-80 was not mentioned as the backbone of the tank fleet until 2025. Only the T-90. So the statement obivously implies large scale purchases, as there are only ~200-300 T-90 tanks in service. Finally the number 25000 is exaggerated, as it includes storage bases and reserve formations. Realistically the numbers are close to ~10 000 tanks out of which 2-3% are T-90 tanks.
In Russia designation would mean that it's passed stated trials iirc. Given that 1) T-90A production is going ahead 2) The new tank will enter production not next year but at the earliest, 2010, we can safely assume that it's not a finished product. That doesn't mean it's not serious, and that doesn't mean we won't see it in frontline units 3-4 year from now (albeit initially in tiny numbers).
No, you're wrong. It's T-90A for 120%. Look on the welded turrets. Only T-90A has welded turret between all Russian tank fleet. That picture is from the range near N-Novgorod, so it cannot be neither Tamanskaya nor Kantemirovskaya div., 3rd MRD is the most probably. The lateral ERA blocks were removed, since they are no needed for excersises. BTW: there are place for 4 such blocks from both side.
The 4th Kantemirovskaja Division has T-80U which are meant to stay in service, so they probably won't be getting T-90A.
There was an announcement that about 90 per year would be introduced into service, but I'm not sure whether that's suppose to be from this year or 2009 onwards