T-72: Still Useful or Not?

[Feanor]

Do not be surprised if they do not change the configuration of this vehicle, they are leaning towards placing engine pact to the front of the vehicle, and a exit ramp at the rear of the vehicle, by doing this they are hoping the improvements in crew protection and ease of vehicle entry will bring in future export sales.

Yeah I heard as much. There is also rumor floating around that a new vehicle is in the works right now. It could turn out to be a permanent replacement for all BTR series. But there was specific criticism of the side doors, in regards to the BTR-80. This leaves me wondering.

 

[eckherl]

I would think it's insane. What role would it serve? The current 30mm offers anti-light armor support, as well as area suppression. The 100mm offers a decent weapon against even MBTs (provided they get a side shot), and offers a guided ATGM.

What's the logic behind replacing this proven design with a single 57mm auto-cannon?

Improvements in projectile technology would give this size caliber gun range and performance, just think about how many rounds they could carry versus a split load of 30mm and 100mm then factor in their little guided wizzers. This vehicle was not designed as a tank but a infantry support vehicle, a auto cannon this size will handle anything less than a tank, punch out building structures and helicopters, and as you stated what is the performance value of the 100mm if you have to rely on a flank shot for heavy armor, 57mm auto cannon would give just as good of a performance. But who knows if they will even field it.

 

[Feanor]

Improvements in projectile technology would give this size caliber gun range and performance, just think about how many rounds they could carry versus a split load of 30mm and 100mm then factor in their little guided wizzers. This vehicle was not designed as a tank but a infantry support vehicle, a auto cannon this size will handle anything less than a tank, punch out building structures and helicopters, and as you stated what is the performance value of the 100mm if you have to rely on a flank shot for heavy armor, 57mm auto cannon would give just as good of a performance. But who knows if they will even field it.

Interesting. It would feature a coaxial 7.62 mg also, yes? And maybe a grenade launcher slaved to the same FCS?

What would your opinion be of a Bakhcha-U firing complex on a BTR-T style design, for a heavy IFV? Except with a T-72 derivative chassis?

 

[Waylander]

I also think that such a heavy AC is interesting but one has to be able to store enough ammo for it. And IMHO one should add an ATGM launcher. Without the 100mm a BMP looses it's ability to launch ATGMs.

 

[Feanor]

This is in response to the 57mm idea, yes? What about the Bakhcha-U on a heavy chassis?

 

[eckherl]

Interesting. It would feature a coaxial 7.62 mg also, yes? And maybe a grenade launcher slaved to the same FCS?

What would your opinion be of a Bakhcha-U firing complex on a BTR-T style design, for a heavy IFV? Except with a T-72 derivative chassis?

Coax is a pretty standard design for any type of of MBT or IFV. I would think that they could go with a better designed chassis versus a mbt hull for this turret design that you referenced to, keep it small.

 

[eckherl]

I also think that such a heavy AC is interesting but one has to be able to store enough ammo for it. And IMHO one should add an ATGM launcher. Without the 100mm a BMP looses it's ability to launch ATGMs.

It would be better for them to get away from a tubed launched system any ways in this caliber, they should go with a exernal mounted system that can be fired under armor.

 

[Waylander]

I agree with that. While tubed launched ATGMs might be ok if they would finally make them top attack/dive attack capable they will need the additional size if they want to implement ECM/Chaff/maneuverability in order to defeat active and passive protection systems.

 

[eckherl]

I agree with that. While tubed launched ATGMs might be ok if they would finally make them top attack/dive attack capable they will need the additional size if they want to implement ECM/Chaff/maneuverability in order to defeat active and passive protection systems.

Agree, for 100 mm gun top attack would be a good missile option to have when engaging modern armor.

 

[MadMike]

T-72 still useful?

I've seen a lot of blown-up T-72s with their turrets popped-off like a Jack-in-the-box. I've never seen the smoking corpse of an M1 Abrams. The T-72s had mostly been smoked with TOW IIs fired from Humvees (3,000-meters vs. 1,500-meters). The 24th Inf. Div. destroyed almost 90 T-72s in one 45-minute engagement. But, the T-72s had been dug into defensive positions and were stationary targets. That was a few years ago, however. I'm sure that both the T-72, and anti-tank missiles have gotten better. It's hard to imagine a better tank than the Abrams. But, at 82-tons, it's awfully heavy.

 

[gf0012-aust]

The Russian Govt has told its ground forces to buy German vehicles/armour from Rheinmetal - so they are obviously not totally enamoured with local product.

Its in last weeks DefenseNews

subscriber only, so unable to cut and paste article. It does however go into detail about russian technology problems as stated by the Russian DefMin equivs

 

[Waylander]

I was shocked I tell you, truly shocked...

Who would have thought that one day Russia buys armor plates from Germany.

 

[Feanor]

I think I posted something about this much earlier. It was a big deal in Russian press. From what I understand, it's an attempt to curb the corruption chain as military goods prices rise higher and higher with increasing budgets, such that budget increases for procurement are often largely eaten by inflation. The armor buy is for light armored vehicles, and automobiles. We'll see what comes of it specifically.

 

[eckherl]

I was shocked I tell you, truly shocked...

Who would have thought that one day Russia buys armor plates from Germany.

I would of liked to be a fly on the wall when that was conveyed to the ground force leadership just to see their face expressions. This only proves that Russia is willing to provide their military with the best available technology when they seem to be lacking in some areas.

 

[Marc 1]

. But, at 82-tons, it's awfully heavy.

May be a tad too heavy there Mike: M1 Abrams - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unless you have some other info?

 

[gf0012-aust]

May be a tad too heavy there Mike: M1 Abrams - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unless you have some other info?

this confusion on weight is what bought some of the australian journos undone. they didn't know the difference between US/Imperial/Metric tonnes

 

[Toby]

still usefull

just wack era on them and in effect the t90 is a t72 on steroids

but the t72 alone its obsolete but upgraded will perform all right it might even do well against western tanks providing theres enough of them remember quantity over quality has a quality of its own.
on a one on one with a western tank not a chance unless its very lucky

also the t72s in desert storm/iraqi freedom where t72m a watared down export with poorly trained crews with low morale

 

[gf0012-aust]

also the t72s in desert storm/iraqi freedom where t72m a watared down export with poorly trained crews with low morale

Not true.

The republican guard divisions had the best gear and certainly had very aggressive and competent tank crews.

they were out trained and out "technologied" by much smaller numbers of opposing tanks due to superior tactics and the fact that the USArmy prepared for the war with approp pre-theatre training etc...

the continued comment that the iraqi crews were serial offenders at a competency level does not apply across the entire force.

 

[Marc 1]

this confusion on weight is what bought some of the australian journos undone. they didn't know the difference between US/Imperial/Metric tonnes

Even using short tons the M1A2SEp is quoted at 69.5t, adding a TUSK kit cannot add 12.5t surely?

 

[gf0012-aust]

Even using short tons the M1A2SEp is quoted at 69.5t, adding a TUSK kit cannot add 12.5t surely?

gawd I'd hope not....