T-90 in Comparison to Western Armour
- Status
destructivetouch
Member
I truly don't understand what do you mean with this statement.
Kind of radar ? I hope that you mean ,with those words,different radar bands and IR frequency's layer.
NII stali has claimed a reduction of detection range of the protected vehicle to about 1/5 or 1/6 of the normal range for radars operating between lower L band to X band (pratically almost those employed today by GMTI or SAR capable long and short range air to ground radars).
Now,is obvious, that a radar with major capabilities will be capable to track a protected target at greater range ,but that has nothing to do with physical characteristic of Nakidka.
Let put,for example, that an Irbis-E has a tracking range 5 times greater than an N019, now ,if an old Mig-29 with its N019 radar track an F/A-18-E at a particular range, is obvious that an Irbis-E, , will track this Super Hornet at.... 5 times that specific range Wink Wink
The RCS reduction features implemented in the Super Hornet are exactly the same and act in almost the same way on both radars (operating in the same radar band); simply IRBIS-E is capable to track any target at 5 times the range of an N019.
Now if instead of the radar capable to detect a T-90 at 180 km of distance present in the NII Stali's video (already corresponding at the best long range surveillance air to ground radar now available worldwide for the task ,like AN-APY-7 ,and in ideal conditions) and reduced to 30 km , you substitute another,in the same radar band, capable to detect that T-90 at 270 km ,the final range of detection against a T-90 equiped with Nakidka will become 45 Km.
The radars are different, the detection ranges are different but Nakidka,obviously is always the same ,or a costant in the radar detection's function.
If want mine opinion (from all the publiations i have read in all those years) i think that a war like Desert Storm or Kosovo War and all the whole doctrine ,force structure design and organization behind them , are entirely designed for a power projection structure just modulated and optimized for fight against that type and class of enemy (knowing that against very powerful enemies the MAD element would guarantee that convetional war's strcture would not have had any real weight ).
An operation like Desert Storm ,for example, would have been totally impossible no simply to conduct but even only to prepare against not a world level military power but even only a truly strong regional power.
If Iraq or also Serbia some years after (which naturally have already in the theatre of operation all theirs forces and all theirs integrated defence systems in place) in fact, would have been equiped with world level offensive and defensive equipment, even merely the slow logistical operations (which required more than six months !!) necessary at merely prepare the minimum infrastructures and at bring in the theatre part of the military equipment and vehicles necessary at the first planned operative strcuture capable to conduct the first misilons ,would have been absolutely impossible .
Image if Iraq ,in 1991, instead of....10 operative long range bombers (8 export versions of Tu-16 and 3 export versions of TU-22 Blinder )devoid of any type of long range,powerful weaponry, would have owned 70-80 original TU-22M equiped with KH-22M and Kh-15 ....for not say conventional armed theatre and intermediate range ballistic missile and long range cruise missile, or modern submarine-launched cruise/ballistic missile ....; the six airfields "offered" by Saudi Arabia to NATO coalition with all the equipment and aircraft,up to this time, transferred and the port of Dhahran ,would have been reduced to a sprawl of smoking craters by a rain of 6 ton mosnsters with a one ton warhead, each with destructive radius equal to 5 BGM-109 shooted by high supersonic bomber from.... 450-500 km of distance diving at Mach 4 from 27 km of altitude (even only the kinetic energy delivered would be equal to the explosion of a pair of JDAM !!) or by much numerous 1,2 ton missiles shooted from 300-350 km of distance dving at Mach-5 from 40 km of altitude ! !
Some military capabilities ,linked to the owning of particular type of offemnsive and defensive weaponry (the trade of which is normally regulated by international rules or diplomacy just because capable to drammatically change or subvert equilibrium in a region) render entire concept of operation totally obsolete and unappliable ; naturally almost always those hindering conventional capabilities are owned and mantained by the same powers ,which own nuclear weapons and which are frozen in the MAD's dynamics.
Last edited:
This depends on how Nakidka achieves this effect, and whether the different type of radar can negate that particular effect.
We have photos of the T-90AM: Gur Khan attacks!: Дебют в Ðижнем Тагиле: модернизированный танк Т-90С
Not grainy pics, but a couple of good close-ups. This isn't the final product, but rather what the T-90AM looked like this winter. Since then other changes have occured, but what they are we will not see until the official unveiling.
It's also still a mystery whether the MoD will purchase this machine.
Not grainy pics, but a couple of good close-ups. This isn't the final product, but rather what the T-90AM looked like this winter. Since then other changes have occured, but what they are we will not see until the official unveiling.
It's also still a mystery whether the MoD will purchase this machine.
The major changes include: ESU TZ Sozvezdie M2 (yes that's the new C4I system), FCS Kalina, a 1130 hp engines (V-93), automatic transmission, Relikt ERA (I've heard it called K-6), the main gun is 2A46M-5, a new version of Sosna-U sight. We should get details some time in the Sep 8-11 time frame.
Thailand has ordered 49 T-84U Oplot tanks.
Lenta.ru: Îðóæèå: Óêðàèíà ïîñòàâèò Òàèëàíäó ïîëñîòíè òàíêîâ
This is the largest production run to date, for this tank. Previously they exported 12 tanks to Georgia, and had assembled ~10 T-84s of unknown configuration for the Ukranian military.
Initial reports that came out a few months ago suggested that the order would be for slightly over a 100 but is still a substantial order for the Ukranians after losing the Malaysian contract some years ago. The July issue of Military Machines had a very detailed article on it by Chris Foss. The T-84U is certainly better protected than Malaysia's PT-91Ms and will be the 2nd best protected tank in the region after Singapore's Leopard 2's.
The article I mentioned above mentions that the Ukranians have developed a 120mm version with a bustle auto-loader. What is a bustle auto-loader?
A bustle autoloader is an autoloader which is fed from a magazine in the turret bustle. With such a configuration one can compartmentalize the ready ammo rack which severly reduces the chance for an ammo hit resulting in a catastrophic hit.
Examples are the autoloaders used by the French Leclerc and Japanese Type 90. The Merkava IV uses a similar system but with a human loader still present.
Examples are the autoloaders used by the French Leclerc and Japanese Type 90. The Merkava IV uses a similar system but with a human loader still present.
The original T-90S has a 12.7mm HMG, the new T-90AM (which is also called the T-90S modernized) has a 7.62 PKT.Can any one tell me what Calibre the HMG that is Mounted on the Roof of the T90 C is?
Also Does the T 90 C Compare well with the T 84 series?
Any pics on the Malaysian T 84's anyone?
Oh and thanks Alexey Khlopotov for the great T 90 C pics! Top Job!
In the August issue of 'Military Machines'' there is an article on Malaysian armour I wrote, that has some pics of the PT-91M.
It looks like the first customer to get the new T-90 variant will be Tadjikistan. They have been promised a number (several hundred) of T-90S and MS tanks, in addition to other goodies, in exchange for extending the agreement to house Russian troops for another 49 years.
Gur Khan attacks!: РФ ПЕРЕВООРУЖИТ ТÐДЖИКСКУЮ ÐРМИЮ Ð’ ОБМЕРÐРПРОДЛЕÐИЕ ÐРЕÐДЫ БÐЗЫ
As of right now the T-90MS will not be purchased at all by the MoD.
Gur Khan attacks!: РФ ПЕРЕВООРУЖИТ ТÐДЖИКСКУЮ ÐРМИЮ Ð’ ОБМЕРÐРПРОДЛЕÐИЕ ÐРЕÐДЫ БÐЗЫ
As of right now the T-90MS will not be purchased at all by the MoD.
It will be intresting to see if any of the improvements planned for the T-90AM for the Indian army - bustle loader auto loader, commanders panaromic sight, BMS, etc - will be fittted on existing Russian army T-90s as part of an upgrade. With the new bustle loader the survivalbility of the MBT in event of a penetration in the turret area will be greatly increased. According to info from a defence blog the T-90AM will also have an OWS.
Last edited:
The latest and production variant of the T-90MS/AM as seen at REA 2011, Nizhniy Tagil.
bmpd - Первые фотографии Т-90Ðœ Ñ Ð²Ñ‹Ñтавки RЕÐ-2011
There is talk of upgrading existing T-90A to that standard, and the T-90AM was developed in conjuction with the Burlak program, which envisioned modernizing T-72 and T-80 tanks by replacing the turret.
bmpd - Первые фотографии Т-90Ðœ Ñ Ð²Ñ‹Ñтавки RЕÐ-2011
There is talk of upgrading existing T-90A to that standard, and the T-90AM was developed in conjuction with the Burlak program, which envisioned modernizing T-72 and T-80 tanks by replacing the turret.
Haavarla
Active Member
My first post in the army thread.
Three question if i may:
First of all, why have the Russian swapped the 12.7 with a 7.62mm gun?
Is the Russian 12.7mm gun unreliable?
I operate the Norwegian/Kongsberg Modified 12.7 with its soft mount and multipurpose ammo in our National Guard.
Its so much more effective as a secondary gun(or stand alone platform for that matter), especialy in theater like Afganistan.
Second Q:
This system has also good feed back from Afganistan, why not mount it on a main battle tank?
US and other Nato countries, have praised the Norwegian mod 12.7mm protection systems.
http://www.kongsberg.com/en/KPS/News/FeatureStories/KPS
Third Q:
How much internal fuel does the T-90 have and does the external fuel barrels give the T-90 much range?
Three question if i may:
First of all, why have the Russian swapped the 12.7 with a 7.62mm gun?
Is the Russian 12.7mm gun unreliable?
I operate the Norwegian/Kongsberg Modified 12.7 with its soft mount and multipurpose ammo in our National Guard.
Its so much more effective as a secondary gun(or stand alone platform for that matter), especialy in theater like Afganistan.
Second Q:
This system has also good feed back from Afganistan, why not mount it on a main battle tank?
US and other Nato countries, have praised the Norwegian mod 12.7mm protection systems.
http://www.kongsberg.com/en/KPS/News/FeatureStories/KPS
Third Q:
How much internal fuel does the T-90 have and does the external fuel barrels give the T-90 much range?
Last edited:
So, more details as promised. The new ammo carriage allows for 40 rounds, including 22 in the auto-loader and 18 in the bustle. The tank also has some sort of unified tactical command system, allowing it to communicate with other tanks, and other land forces. It's unclear which it has (likely Sozvezdie as standard) and I suspect that option will depend on the customer.
As of right now negotiations are going on between the MoD and UVZ about price.
Gur Khan attacks!: «Ð¢Ð¸Ñ€Ð°Ð½Ð½Ð¾Ð·Ð°Ð²Ñ€» идет на «ÐŸÑ€Ð¾Ñ€Ñ‹Ð²»
As of right now negotiations are going on between the MoD and UVZ about price.
Gur Khan attacks!: «Ð¢Ð¸Ñ€Ð°Ð½Ð½Ð¾Ð·Ð°Ð²Ñ€» идет на «ÐŸÑ€Ð¾Ñ€Ñ‹Ð²»
- Status