T-84 Serial Production?

[Feanor]

According to arms-expo Ukraine is selling another ~20 tanks to Georgia. 12 of them are T-84 Oplot tanks.

 îêòÿáðå Óêðàèíà ïîñòàâèò Ãðóçèè áîëåå äâàäöàòè òàíêîâ — ÎÐÓÆÈÅ ÐÎÑÑÈÈ, Ôåäåðàëüíûé ýëåêòðîííûé ñïðàâî÷íèê âîîðóæåíèÿ è âîåííîé òåõíèêè

I was wondering if anyone else had any news about the T-84 actually being in production? Last I heard were rumors of ~10 tanks being purchased by the Ukranian military, but since then they've had budget issues arise. Could those be the same tanks now being sold to Georgia?

 

[eckherl]

According to arms-expo Ukraine is selling another ~20 tanks to Georgia. 12 of them are T-84 Oplot tanks.

 îêòÿáðå Óêðàèíà ïîñòàâèò Ãðóçèè áîëåå äâàäöàòè òàíêîâ*—*ÎÐÓÆÈÅ ÐÎÑÑÈÈ, Ôåäåðàëüíûé ýëåêòðîííûé ñïðàâî÷íèê âîîðóæåíèÿ è âîåííîé òåõíèêè

I was wondering if anyone else had any news about the T-84 actually being in production? Last I heard were rumors of ~10 tanks being purchased by the Ukranian military, but since then they've had budget issues arise. Could those be the same tanks now being sold to Georgia?

These will be the older versions due to Ukraine wanting to go with their latest and greatest upgrade package. As far as new T-84 production for Ukraine I would not hold my breath on that one due to major economic issues in that country for their entire Armed Forces.

 

[Feanor]

Right but Ukraine never produced very many T-84s to my knowledge. Is this part of a serial production run? Or are these a limited number of machines built just for this order?

EDIT: I know the Ukranian military isn't getting the T-84 any time soon. There is a reason their "elite" units are getting their T-64Bs modernized.

 

[eckherl]

Right but Ukraine never produced very many T-84s to my knowledge. Is this part of a serial production run? Or are these a limited number of machines built just for this order?

EDIT: I know the Ukranian military isn't getting the T-84 any time soon. There is a reason their "elite" units are getting their T-64Bs modernized.

I really do not know the answer to that one yet but one must ask why 12, would make sense if Georgians obligated themselves to purchase additional units in the near future.

 

[Waylander]

One might also say that 12 are enough to show some pretty new tanks to the public...

The problems of the Georgians weren't their tanks and other frontline equipment but training, C3, planning, combined arms organisation and spirit.
But hey, showing a new tank is much easier than saying "we had deficiencies in these areas and we are working on correcting them".

 

[plasmahawk]

awesome!

Hope I dont get banned, Im being cheeky here and humorous.

Finally new hardware is being sent to Georgia for the Russian forces to capture during the next peace offensive (ahem).
Last time they got some Dana Howitzers and Hummers, next time some Oplots. Cool

Why not just ship them directly to Moscow, and save the secondary shipping costs and scratches on the armor by the Georgian tank drivers.

--

On the more appropriate note, making this reply worthy, its sad to see the former USSR countries, including Russia herself, selling latest gear to other nations rather than building up its own defenses, wikipedia says 1200 T-90s in Russia and 300+ in India, yet how many modern proper T-90s are really in Russian, and what about modern aircraft, new stuff is going over to clients, instead of being used for internal forces.

For shame.. Russia and Ukraine should just unite again, and get back to making what they are good at, thats Vodka and Salo ( Baconfat.. mm mm good http://www.russianvodka.com/how-to-drink-vodka/how-to-drink-vodka-29.jpg ) and the good ol SS-18 aka R-36.

Interestingly enough I have family in Dnepropetrovsk where there SS-18 was designed and partially manufactured.

Out and out,

PS I hate being in China, Defence talk forum works, but nothing else works. I think the internet here is also not the real internet but rather a copy of a copy of the western internet, and its slow because lead is used instead of copper in the network cables.

Plas

According to arms-expo Ukraine is selling another ~20 tanks to Georgia. 12 of them are T-84 Oplot tanks.

 îêòÿáðå Óêðàèíà ïîñòàâèò Ãðóçèè áîëåå äâàäöàòè òàíêîâ*—*ÎÐÓÆÈÅ ÐÎÑÑÈÈ, Ôåäåðàëüíûé ýëåêòðîííûé ñïðàâî÷íèê âîîðóæåíèÿ è âîåííîé òåõíèêè

I was wondering if anyone else had any news about the T-84 actually being in production? Last I heard were rumors of ~10 tanks being purchased by the Ukranian military, but since then they've had budget issues arise. Could those be the same tanks now being sold to Georgia?

 

[DavidDCM]

Maybe the 12 tanks are what Ukraine can deliver immediately (the news item says deliveries will be finished already in October so I guess those tanks aren't newly produced). And if Georgia wants more tanks, the Ukrainians might start producing new ones somewhere in the future. It would be interesting to know what tanks and how many of them Georgia still has in service after the war and how many they would need to fully compensate their losses, or what their future plans for their tank fleet are. That is, if they have a reasonable future plan already.

 

[eckherl]

One might also say that 12 are enough to show some pretty new tanks to the public...

The problems of the Georgians weren't their tanks and other frontline equipment but training, C3, planning, combined arms organisation and spirit.
But hey, showing a new tank is much easier than saying "we had deficiencies in these areas and we are working on correcting them".

Well the U.S is back training them again and hopefully they will listen to their advisors, equipment procurement is rather limited as to where they can pull from especially for the more technically advanced items.

 

[eckherl]

Maybe the 12 tanks are what Ukraine can deliver immediately (the news item says deliveries will be finished already in October so I guess those tanks aren't newly produced). And if Georgia wants more tanks, the Ukrainians might start producing new ones somewhere in the future. It would be interesting to know what tanks and how many of them Georgia still has in service after the war and how many they would need to fully compensate their losses, or what their future plans for their tank fleet are. That is, if they have a reasonable future plan already.

Aint that the bugger of it David, know one really knows exact numbers of T-84 that are sitting in warehouses, I know a few of them have made it to the U.S and that was a few years back. One would come to the sensible conclusion that Georgia will purchaes additional units and replace some of the less advanced T-72s that aree in Georgia inventory. Estimates are that Georgia lost at least 30% of their tank inventory during conflict with Russia, as stated by some others in past posts this was due to poor training in tactics, Russia could of went in there with T-55s and the result would of been the same.

 

[Feanor]

Hehe we went in with T-62 and T-62Ms from the 42nd Motor-Rifles.... though I imagine if we went in with T-55s, a lot more would've broken down. It is a pretty old tank. Even newer T-72s and BMPs showed mechanical reliability issues.

Anyways... to respond to the T-90 question, there should currently be 100-150 T-90 baseline, and 248 T-90A in RuA inventory. The baseline T-90 should be in the 10th Tank Brigade, the T-90A are in the 4th an 6th Tank Brigades, and in the 4th and 7th Military Bases (Ossetia and Abkhazia).

As to the T-84s replacing the T-72s, that's unlikely. The Georgians even had T-55s in service during the conflict. Their tank inventory isn't large enough to allow them to retire T-72s, especially given recent casualties. And it should be well over 30%, if we consider that 65 tanks were captured.

 

[eckherl]

Hehe we went in with T-62 and T-62Ms from the 42nd Motor-Rifles.... though I imagine if we went in with T-55s, a lot more would've broken down. It is a pretty old tank. Even newer T-72s and BMPs showed mechanical reliability issues.

Anyways... to respond to the T-90 question, there should currently be 100-150 T-90 baseline, and 248 T-90A in RuA inventory. The baseline T-90 should be in the 10th Tank Brigade, the T-90A are in the 4th an 6th Tank Brigades, and in the 4th and 7th Military Bases (Ossetia and Abkhazia).

As to the T-84s replacing the T-72s, that's unlikely. The Georgians even had T-55s in service during the conflict. Their tank inventory isn't large enough to allow them to retire T-72s, especially given recent casualties. And it should be well over 30%, if we consider that 65 tanks were captured.

I do not believe the Russians when they lay claim to capturing 65 tanks, when did the Georgians state this, pure Russian propaganda. T-72 numbers needed for replenishment was around twenty in which 10 will be delivered along with their new T-84 tanks. T-55 wasn`t even a major player in that conflict. I did not state anything about retiring T-72s in the short term future, long term yes if they can procure a more advanced model which appears that they may be starting at the dismay of the Russians.

 

[Feanor]

The T-55 is supposedly still in service with Georgian armored units. Iirc one of the photos I uploaded has what looks like a burned out T-55 tank in it.

I don't know about 20 captured tanks. The photos of captured tanks seem to show a lot of them. I'll see if I can find a good shot. You were the one that said 30%.... iirc the Georgian tank pool was over 200 units before the war. So 65 would be ~30%. When you add to this that there are impressively few photos of destroyed armor from that war (with the exception of those two destroyed T-72s in the center of Tshinval, of those there is abundant footage) it wouldn't be surprising if the claims were relatively accurate.

 

[DavidDCM]

During the course of the war I've collected as many publicly available images as possible. A photo of a destroyed T-55 was not among them. What can be clearly identified are 9 T-72 tanks, which are supposed to be 8 Georgian tanks (3 T-72A, 5 T-72B) and one Russian T-72B, but of course there were possibly more destroyed tanks in areas not accessible to journalists. Also the Russians have shown images of some captured T-72SIM-1 upgrades.

 

[Waylander]

Well the U.S is back training them again and hopefully they will listen to their advisors, equipment procurement is rather limited as to where they can pull from especially for the more technically advanced items.

That won't help them anymore than it did in the past unless the US advisors start training them for real combined arms warfare on their homesoil.
In the past the US trained them for deployments in Iraq and that's were the cream of their troops went.
I wonder if the money for the T-84s is well invested.
One should think that they have alot of other items on their list which need to be adressed. Spending alot of money for a secure and redundant C3i system and lots of training for the troops for example.
That would do them much more good than a dozen modern tanks could ever do. And I just can't imagine that their budget isn't stretched to the limits as it is.

 

[Feanor]

During the course of the war I've collected as many publicly available images as possible. A photo of a destroyed T-55 was not among them. What can be clearly identified are 9 T-72 tanks, which are supposed to be 8 Georgian tanks (3 T-72A, 5 T-72B) and one Russian T-72B, but of course there were possibly more destroyed tanks in areas not accessible to journalists. Also the Russians have shown images of some captured T-72SIM-1 upgrades.

I think that was my mistake. I didn't take a very close look at the photo. This is the picture I was talking about.

Though there is definetly a photo of Abkhaz troops, with a T-55.

 

[DavidDCM]

That won't help them anymore than it did in the past unless the US advisors start training them for real combined arms warfare on their homesoil.
In the past the US trained them for deployments in Iraq and that's were the cream of their troops went.
I wonder if the money for the T-84s is well invested.
One should think that they have alot of other items on their list which need to be adressed. Spending alot of money for a secure and redundant C3i system and lots of training for the troops for example.
That would do them much more good than a dozen modern tanks could ever do. And I just can't imagine that their budget isn't stretched to the limits as it is.

Georgia has different worries then sending their best soldiers to some distant corners of this planet, so US advisors should start training them in conventional warfare, if they did not already.

The best thing obviously would be to train them properly AND let them buy new equipment. As their improvements in training and organization can not be measured from the outside, buying new equipment is the only sign we see of their recovery. At some point they have to begin to replace their losses.

 

[Waylander]

Sure they have to replace their losses.
But are 12 T-84 really worth the costs? Not only could one maybe get some upgraded T-72s for less money bould one also has to implement a new supply chain for the Oplots.
But maybe they got them at a bargain price...

If they really lost ca. 30% of their tank inventory I wouldn't rate this as crippling and they may very well be able to operate with the tanks left for some time.
They weren't able to deploy the bulk of their tank fleet to the battles in south-ossetia and what went there was poorly employed.

I am also curious about wether the US training has changed since the war or if they still focus on COIN operations.

 

[eckherl]

The T-55 is supposedly still in service with Georgian armored units. Iirc one of the photos I uploaded has what looks like a burned out T-55 tank in it.

I don't know about 20 captured tanks. The photos of captured tanks seem to show a lot of them. I'll see if I can find a good shot. You were the one that said 30%.... iirc the Georgian tank pool was over 200 units before the war. So 65 would be ~30%. When you add to this that there are impressively few photos of destroyed armor from that war (with the exception of those two destroyed T-72s in the center of Tshinval, of those there is abundant footage) it wouldn't be surprising if the claims were relatively accurate.

Yes 30%, not just captured or abandoned, this percentage is for everything destroyed and captured, Russia stated that they captured 65 alone and this is what I am need believing. Your T-55 sightings more than likely belongs to Russia`s friends.

 

[eckherl]

I think that was my mistake. I didn't take a very close look at the photo. This is the picture I was talking about.

Though there is definetly a photo of Abkhaz troops, with a T-55.

Your photo is a destroyed T-72.

 

[eckherl]

Sure they have to replace their losses.
But are 12 T-84 really worth the costs? Not only could one maybe get some upgraded T-72s for less money bould one also has to implement a new supply chain for the Oplots.
But maybe they got them at a bargain price...

If they really lost ca. 30% of their tank inventory I wouldn't rate this as crippling and they may very well be able to operate with the tanks left for some time.
They weren't able to deploy the bulk of their tank fleet to the battles in south-ossetia and what went there was poorly employed.

I am also curious about wether the US training has changed since the war or if they still focus on COIN operations.

There is supposed to be 10 T-72s thrown in this deal also to help get them back up to strength with more to follow, T-84 follow on deals for long term T-72 replacements is supposed to happen, this remains to be seen. The problem that Georgia is facing is getting their hands on big ticket items, Russia has been very vocal to anyone giving them a hand and have stated that they will be at odds with anyone who sells to them. After reviewing some of the after action reports it seems that one of the biggest blunders with the Georgians has to do with their top leadership including the President who decided to tell his commanders on what they were going to do during the fighting, he micro managed the battle to a point as to where he was telling them where to move their artillery. Their artillery was actually doing a good job of giving the Russians a fit, Russian commanders could never pinpoint their fire positions because they were taught to do pretty much what our cannon cockers do after a fire mission, move, I used this for example purposes. Big changes will have to start with their top staff and if we are smart we will let them concentrate on the defense of their home country, the lower ranked officers and men did what good of a job that they could until they were feeling the big communication breakdown that was coming from higher staff. Does this mean that the outcome would of been any different if things ran smoothly for the Georgians, more than likely not, it would of only caused more loss of life on both sides.