T-90 Tank

[Haavarla]

I haven't been following the latest development.
Does the latest T-90 and M1 variants come with APU installed in which the tank does not need a running Main engine to operate all its systems?

Last i checked it is being installed on the very latest Leopard MBT, or at least the latest upgrade package.

This feature alone increase the operation time/range by a great extent and help suppress IR signature.

 

[Milne Bay]

I haven't been following the latest development.
Does the latest T-90 and M1 variants come with APU installed in which the tank does not need a running Main engine to operate all its systems?

Last i checked it is being installed on the very latest Leopard MBT, or at least the latest upgade package.

This feature alone increase the operation time/range by a great extent and help suppress IR signature.

The M1 has had this capacity for quite some time - it was part of the specification for the Australian M1's. I think it is also a part of upgrade packages to the US tanks as well. As for the T-90, I would be surprised if it is not there
MB

 

[John Fedup]

I haven't been following the latest development.
Does the latest T-90 and M1 variants come with APU installed in which the tank does not need a running Main engine to operate all its systems?

Last i checked it is being installed on the very latest Leopard MBT, or at least the latest upgrade package.

This feature alone increase the operation time/range by a great extent and help suppress IR signature.

As MB says, the APU was part of an upgrade for the M1 and perhaps the T-90, like the Leo, has this as well. That being said, the APU is much more important for the turbine powered M1 Abrams than for diesel powered tanks. In any event an APU is a valuable option for a MBT for the reasons you mentioned as well as extending the maintenance interval for the main propulsion engine.

 

[corporalclegg]

Iran is ready to buy a T-90 with only its construction technology

 

[Toblerone]

Iran is ready to buy a T-90 with only its construction technology

Yes, the article republished in the front page mentions that the sanctions pertaining to equipment like tanks are lifted soon. It also made me laugh:

On February 9, Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan announced that Iran has already “designed and built [a] new battle tank from scratch” that is comparable to the T-90S, called the Karrar.

Hahahaha, no. No, you will fork over the money and start T-90 production. :hehe

In their shoes I would also look to get more S300. Maybe some specially upgraded versions with S400 technology, which I would still refer to simply as S300.

 

[Toblerone]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovpXf3QZ4YE

I have some questions. Is this in Syria? Did it really jam the guidance of the incoming rocket or is it some malfunction, like a broken wire or something? Isn't this type of weapon wire-guided, how is it jammed?

Is this really Shtora at work and is this the way it works?

EDIT: Some posted a useful comment on reddit, where I saw the video:
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/46vpb0/t90_shtora_jamming_in_action_in_syria/d0879q2

According to that Shtora tricks the launcher into disregarding the flare at the back of the missile in favour of its own emission. Also, this is probably not in Syria or actual combat.

 

[Toblerone]

I saw a video, its title is
"Syria 26.2.2016 - TOW strike against probably a T-90 ( claim T-72 by rebels ) in west Aleppo"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYOJSz1WOEg

Seems it is a T-90 taking pot shots with its machine gun with partial cover and it eats the hit at the turret, the ERA burst. I *guess* there wasn't much damage or injuries overall. What do you think? Seems to me that's the worst possible spot and angle to hit a tank like that. But still I am not sure what Shtora is supposed to be doing ...

 

[Haavarla]

For the tank itself, i think it took light damage from the hit.
But the crew is another matter, it looked like the commander hatch was in an open position, and with the shockwave would severly injure the crew.

The shockwave is more leathal for any crew inside amoured wehicles, even if the round does not penetrate.

 

[Feanor]

But still I am not sure what Shtora is supposed to be doing ...

I don't think Shtora was working.

 

[Toblerone]

I don't think Shtora was working.

Shouldn't it have been active at the time? The tank was firing its machine gun, it was obviously in contact with the enemy. And the TOW strike was from rather close.

 

[bdique]

I saw a video, its title is
"Syria 26.2.2016 - TOW strike against probably a T-90 ( claim T-72 by rebels ) in west Aleppo"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYOJSz1WOEg

Seems it is a T-90 taking pot shots with its machine gun with partial cover and it eats the hit at the turret, the ERA burst. I *guess* there wasn't much damage or injuries overall. What do you think? Seems to me that's the worst possible spot and angle to hit a tank like that. But still I am not sure what Shtora is supposed to be doing ...

TOW gunner could have been aiming for the turret/chassis gap. The rapidity of the gunner's exit could indicate that there was damage sustained, maybe even a small internal fire.

 

[Feanor]

Shouldn't it have been active at the time? The tank was firing its machine gun, it was obviously in contact with the enemy. And the TOW strike was from rather close.

It should have, but you can see the projectors fairly clearly and they're not lit.

TOW gunner could have been aiming for the turret/chassis gap. The rapidity of the gunner's exit could indicate that there was damage sustained, maybe even a small internal fire.

I'm not an expert, but a number of people who know, on Russian sites, have commented that with the hatches open, that impact would leave the gunner with a serious concussion, if not worse.

 

[bdique]

I'm not an expert, but a number of people who know, on Russian sites, have commented that with the hatches open, that impact would leave the gunner with a serious concussion, if not worse.

Hmm. Won't call myself an expert either but that makes sense. Still, the gunner escaped with his life...guess that says something about attempting a head-on attack on the T-90.

 

[gf0012-aust]

a number of people who know, on Russian sites, have commented that with the hatches open, that impact would leave the gunner with a serious concussion, if not worse.

as soon as the hatch is open you dramatically change the acoustics and integrity of the platform

I would not envy anyone left inside when that bloke left the hatch open. It wouldn't surprise me to find that some of them suffered from internal shock, haemoraging etc.....

 

[Feanor]

Hmm. Won't call myself an expert either but that makes sense. Still, the gunner escaped with his life...guess that says something about attempting a head-on attack on the T-90.

I suspect the tank didn't take much damage, and the gunner bailed because he was injured.

 

[KMM4x4]

In Russia every year on May 9 on the Victory Day in Moscow at Red Square these tanks pass. Though T-90 nowadays isn't considered the best Russian tank. There was now T-14 of Armat who is even better than T-90.

 

[ngatimozart]

In Russia every year on May 9 on the Victory Day in Moscow at Red Square these tanks pass. Though T-90 nowadays isn't considered the best Russian tank. There was now T-14 of Armat who is even better than T-90.

Welcome to the forum. I would suggest reading the Forum Rules. I suggest that you expand on your post a bit because it doesn't really say a lot, apart from the obvious. Why do you think that the T14 is better than the T90? In my case armour is not my specific area of interest, so I don't know a lot about it and I am always interested in learning something new.

 

[KMM4x4]

What interests you on T-14 Armat? Engine, arms, protection, suspension bracket, configuration. Tell about what to you it would be desirable to learn in more detail, I will tell.

 

[gf0012-aust]

What interests you on T-14 Armat? Engine, arms, protection, suspension bracket, configuration. Tell about what to you it would be desirable to learn in more detail, I will tell.

The onus is on you to expand on the issue - not the OP - that was his point

look at your prev post again, you make statements without some supporting substance to back up those comments

Please read the forum rules carefully before responding again

 

[KMM4x4]

ngatimozart

At T-14 unlike T-90 the tower uninhabited and crew is in office which is isolated from a fighting stock. On T-90 the fighting stock is on perimeter of a tower and if the enemy shell gets to him, the fighting stock of the tank detonates and all crew perishes. At T-90 good fire power but problems with safety of crew. At T-14 it the problem was fixed having isolated crew from a fighting stock.