More T-72s for Iraq?!

[gf0012-aust]

Extra info:

• The T-72's will be zero framed
• They will be rebuilt by Defence Solutions, Exton, Pa
• They will be refitted with new digital displays, thermasl sights, radios, laser range finder. laser detector.

This supplements 77 ex Hungarian T-72's rebuilt under the same requirements over 3 years ago - the Iraqis are very happy with the results.

They want the T-72's as mass respondents and the M1's as the heavy hitters.

The Iraqis are indicating that they want more M1's as well, and an extra 4000 armoured vehicles

(Defencenews 12/Jan/2009)

 

[Almaleki]

hey hey freakin let the Idea it Have Been Declined a month Age on the National TV

 

[Feanor]

hey hey freakin let the Idea it Have Been Declined a month Age on the National TV

So you think Iraq will not operate any T-72 tanks beyond what's already in service?

 

[gf0012-aust]

hey hey freakin let the Idea it Have Been Declined a month Age on the National TV

and yet this has come through military channels last week....

me? I'd be waiting for official Iraqi Govt commentary - not a TV program.

You do realise that some of this is already underway?

 

[eckherl]

hey hey freakin let the Idea it Have Been Declined a month Age on the National TV

You cannot depend on news channels for this type of information, yes more M1s are in the works if Iraq wants them after the initial batch is completed, this means with training completion also. Additional T-72s will also be purchased that are at a upgraded standard, and it is realistic for Iraq to get their hands on 1,000 T-72s after it is all said and done.

 

[eckherl]

Hehe. We're apologizing to each other now. :

Anyways, out of curiosity, does the Iraqi army already have a military doctrine?

Of course they already have a military doctrine, the bugger will be to get them to start using ours instead of Russia`s.

 

[Feanor]

Of course they already have a military doctrine, the bugger will be to get them to start using ours instead of Russia`s.

Is there anywhere we can read that doctrine?

By Russian doctrine, you mean the actual tactical and operational level, right? Because on any higher level it becomes nation-specific.

 

[eckherl]

Is there anywhere we can read that doctrine?

By Russian doctrine, you mean the actual tactical and operational level, right? Because on any higher level it becomes nation-specific.[/QUOT

Russian doctrine as far as Land tactics, both offensive and defensive, Iraq had Russian Military advisors over there before the start of GW 2 and possibly GW 3, we cannot compare Russian tactics to the way Iraq fought both wars due to other issues that they faced. A true Russian indepth defensive doctrine can be a thing of beuty when set up properly.

 

[Tavarisch]

I've heard one of the many reasons the T72M1s and M84s over there got hit very badly was because of the lack of real tactical use. Iraqi Commanders were alleged to use them more as pillboxes and static formations rather than use them in a maneuver warfare style. Though the static formations were successful in very few cases, it is clearly an error.

Also, very few of them were equipped with ERA( if any had them at all) There was this one report that I heard where the M829s (Not the A1, A2 or A3 variant though, could be the reason) bounced off the turret of an ERA-fitted T72M1V. Don't know how far that's true, but I heard about somewhere.

 

[eckherl]

I've heard one of the many reasons the T72M1s and M84s over there got hit very badly was because of the lack of real tactical use. Iraqi Commanders were alleged to use them more as pillboxes and static formations rather than use them in a maneuver warfare style. Though the static formations were successful in very few cases, it is clearly an error.

Also, very few of them were equipped with ERA( if any had them at all) There was this one report that I heard where the M829s (Not the A1, A2 or A3 variant though, could be the reason) bounced off the turret of an ERA-fitted T72M1V. Don't know how far that's true, but I heard about somewhere.

Yes, poor training and bad tactics played into it along with being demoralized from the air campaign.

M829A2 and 3 were not even fielded during this time frame, M829A3 is sitting inside of storage depots and no U.S tank armor crewman has even carried it on their tanks.

The story of the Iraqi T-72 with ERA getting hit with a plain jane M829 and not penetrated is nothing more than internet fanboy rubbish.

 

[Tavarisch]

Yes, poor training and bad tactics played into it along with being demoralized from the air campaign.

M829A2 and 3 were not even fielded during this time frame, M829A3 is sitting inside of storage depots and no U.S tank armor crewman has even carried it on their tanks.

The story of the Iraqi T-72 with ERA getting hit with a plain jane M829 and not penetrated is nothing more than internet fanboy rubbish.

Are you sure? Russian analysts claim that Kontakt-5 could've stood against the standard M829 but not the A1. That's why the A1 was made in the first place I've heard.

 

[OPSSG]

Are you sure? Russian analysts claim that Kontakt-5 could've stood against the standard M829 but not the A1. That's why the A1 was made in the first place I've heard.

Dear Tavarisch, please find out more about eckherl and why he is greatly respected by many in DT (including me)...

 

[Tavarisch]

If you suggest so......

And just so you guys know, I am not one of those nation chest thumpers that would tell you the T-72M1 is better than an M1A1. It's never gonna happen.

 

[Waylander]

Okay if you insist on this stiry than I say something about it.

First, you know how the different kinds of ERA work?
The additional centimeters of steel an ERA tile adds to the main armor is not going to let a KE bounce of it. What makes ERA effective against certain threads is that the different kinds of ERA are active. They use explosives, moving plates, etc. to disrupt a HEAT weapon or to blund a KE.
KEs don't just bounce of.

Some modern heavy ERA (Light ERA is just plain useless against KEs) might reduce the penetration capabilities of modern KEs.
But thinking that a round which normally enters the turret front of an T-72M1 and leaves it at the back without loosing much of it's energy is going to get stopped by any kind of ERA is...ehrrm...optimistic at best.

 

[eckherl]

Are you sure? Russian analysts claim that Kontakt-5 could've stood against the standard M829 but not the A1. That's why the A1 was made in the first place I've heard.

What makes you so sure that Iraq had their hands on K5, because they did not, also what makes you so sure that we had the standard M829 in Iraq.

 

[Tavarisch]

What makes you so sure that Iraq had their hands on K5, because they did not, also what makes you so sure that we had the standard M829 in Iraq.

God, I'm making a fool of myself at every turn. I've GOT TO stop making assumptions.

 

[Almaleki]

Admin:

Text deleted. Off Topic. Please refer to the forum rules and stay within the bounds of those rules.

 

[Feanor]

............................

That really makes no sense. Please try to make it more understandable. Thanks.

 

[eckherl]

General Dynamics just recieved the go ahead to manufacture 140 M1A1 SA tanks for Iraq, they wil be built in Lima Ohio and come equipped with 2nd generation thermal sights for Gunner and TC, Tusk 1 kits and the new Tiger engine pact. I know someone is going to ask what the SA designation stands for so here it is. (Situational Awareness)

 

[Waylander]

Thanks for the infos.

Any battlefield management system like in the AIMs?
And do you know which kind of ammo they are going to get?