>t-90
A rebranded t-72 because saddam ruined the reputation of the t-72s. T-72s are just cheap and easy to produce tank. With downgraded components that were in the t-64. The t-80 is basically the upgraded version of the t-64 and is a better tank. T-90m is just a poor attempt at modernizing their tanks to catch up to western tanks.
Except Russian T-80s were a logistical nightmare compared to the 72s and they fared just as poorly as the T90s. Maybe slavshit is just that - complete shit.
They are a logistical nightmare, but they are still better tanks than the t-72. T-64/t-80 were the best soviet tanks. They didn't produce that many because it was expensive.
Because of a moronic turbine(for arctic warfare) from a helicopter, and some space slav magic instead of automatic transmission. There was always an option to replace it. But they chose to support only Uralvagonzavod.
like the said t90 is t 72 with some upgrades (wectern optics) and some new ERA on the front turret and front hull armour none of that helps to survive top or side atacks from rockets.
Jus treat it as a t72abdcefg instead of a brand new tank(because its not).
T72 was shit, and it proves to be shit again.
The main mystery was solved in the process, it was not about Saddams t72 were monkey models, its about t72 being monkey tank by design.
>some new ERA on the front turret and front hull armour
T-90A (and T-90M) has a completely different turret to T-72.
The initial T-90 from 1992 had a T-72 turret, but those were refitted with welded turrets as T-90As by the mid 2000s.
Ukraine lost the casting capability which is why the Kharkiv plant had to weld export T-80UD turrets for Pakistan together from smaller cast elements instead of a single casting. Russia refused to provide cast turrets for Ukraine's arms industry.
Later developments like Oplot have a welded turret similar to T-90 as both are based on USSR-era turrets for projects like Object 187
Russia itself can still produce cast turrets and probably still does because they're cheaper
the problem of the T-80 is it has a turbine engine and guzzles fuel. while not a problem for the US, for russia that already has insufficient lift capacity its a nightmare.
ukrainian tank crews also prefer the T-64 over other tanks. if a tank designed in 1962 is prefered over others imagine how shit the others are.
also we should give them 10 leos, abrams', leclercs, challengers and k2s just to see which would fare better
when america pushed the idea of russia being a real and credible threat during the cold war the russians fell for it as easily as congress did. america has kept far ahead of a foe that doesn’t exist, it was stupid of us to ever think of these tanks as nothing more than a basis for enemies in a call of duty game.
>IMAGINE A COUNTRY MAKING TANKS THAT CAN REVERSE AT A TOP SPEED OF 4 KM/H
I CANT IMAGINE IT.
THE POLAKS SAW THE TANK FIGHTS IN UKRAINE GOING DOWN, AND 30 SECONDS LATER THEY LITERALLY GAVE AWAY FOR FREE ALL THEIR RUSSIAN-MADE TANKS TO UKRAINE.
THIS WAS THE FUNNIEST SHIT THAT HAPPENED IN THE ENTIRE WAR.
PLEASE FORGIVE CAPS LOCK, MY EYESIGHT IS JUST SHIT.
and they ordered like a thousand Abrams and 2KPL Korean tanks another 10 seconds later.
Frick, that had to be the biggest military eye-opening moment since Macedonians seeing elephants for the first time.
and they ordered like a thousand Abrams and 2KPL Korean tanks another 10 seconds later.
Frick, that had to be the biggest military eye-opening moment since Macedonians seeing elephants for the first time.
i found my glasses.
BLINDANON, HOLT DOWN CTRL KEY AND SCOLL UP/DOWN USING THE MOUSE WHEEL
>t-90
A rebranded t-72 because saddam ruined the reputation of the t-72s. T-72s are just cheap and easy to produce tank. With downgraded components that were in the t-64. The t-80 is basically the upgraded version of the t-64 and is a better tank. T-90m is just a poor attempt at modernizing their tanks to catch up to western tanks.
Except Russian T-80s were a logistical nightmare compared to the 72s and they fared just as poorly as the T90s. Maybe slavshit is just that - complete shit.
They are a logistical nightmare, but they are still better tanks than the t-72. T-64/t-80 were the best soviet tanks. They didn't produce that many because it was expensive.
at least the t-80 can reverse at more than 4km/h
Because of a moronic turbine(for arctic warfare) from a helicopter, and some space slav magic instead of automatic transmission. There was always an option to replace it. But they chose to support only Uralvagonzavod.
somehow ukrainians are doing fine using them. the problem is with the soldiers not with the equipment
like the said t90 is t 72 with some upgrades (wectern optics) and some new ERA on the front turret and front hull armour none of that helps to survive top or side atacks from rockets.
Jus treat it as a t72abdcefg instead of a brand new tank(because its not).
T72 was shit, and it proves to be shit again.
The main mystery was solved in the process, it was not about Saddams t72 were monkey models, its about t72 being monkey tank by design.
the new T-90Ms have russian made optics
>some new ERA on the front turret and front hull armour
T-90A (and T-90M) has a completely different turret to T-72.
The initial T-90 from 1992 had a T-72 turret, but those were refitted with welded turrets as T-90As by the mid 2000s.
Tank in the OP is a T-72B3
>with welded turrets
Anon said that's because they lost the casting technology
Ukraine lost the casting capability which is why the Kharkiv plant had to weld export T-80UD turrets for Pakistan together from smaller cast elements instead of a single casting. Russia refused to provide cast turrets for Ukraine's arms industry.
Later developments like Oplot have a welded turret similar to T-90 as both are based on USSR-era turrets for projects like Object 187
Russia itself can still produce cast turrets and probably still does because they're cheaper
>Ukraine lost the casting capability
So did Russia.
Russian turrets were cast in Mariupol, lol.
>Tank in the OP is a T-72B3
isnt that the joke ?
>not about Saddams t72 were monkey models, its about t72 being monkey tank by design
kek, stealing this.
the problem of the T-80 is it has a turbine engine and guzzles fuel. while not a problem for the US, for russia that already has insufficient lift capacity its a nightmare.
ukrainian tank crews also prefer the T-64 over other tanks. if a tank designed in 1962 is prefered over others imagine how shit the others are.
also we should give them 10 leos, abrams', leclercs, challengers and k2s just to see which would fare better
One picture of destroyed tank does not mitigate great success of this tank, despite low supplies and overwhelming numbers of HATO weaponry.
what about one thousand pictures and shrinking lines?
In what way was the T-90 a "great success"?
when america pushed the idea of russia being a real and credible threat during the cold war the russians fell for it as easily as congress did. america has kept far ahead of a foe that doesn’t exist, it was stupid of us to ever think of these tanks as nothing more than a basis for enemies in a call of duty game.
>T90
You mean T72BU?
Its just a renamed T72.
>IMAGINE A COUNTRY MAKING TANKS THAT CAN REVERSE AT A TOP SPEED OF 4 KM/H
I CANT IMAGINE IT.
THE POLAKS SAW THE TANK FIGHTS IN UKRAINE GOING DOWN, AND 30 SECONDS LATER THEY LITERALLY GAVE AWAY FOR FREE ALL THEIR RUSSIAN-MADE TANKS TO UKRAINE.
THIS WAS THE FUNNIEST SHIT THAT HAPPENED IN THE ENTIRE WAR.
PLEASE FORGIVE CAPS LOCK, MY EYESIGHT IS JUST SHIT.
and they ordered like a thousand Abrams and 2KPL Korean tanks another 10 seconds later.
Frick, that had to be the biggest military eye-opening moment since Macedonians seeing elephants for the first time.
i found my glasses.
I'm glad you found your glasses, anon.
BLINDANON, HOLT DOWN CTRL KEY AND SCOLL UP/DOWN USING THE MOUSE WHEEL
>What went wrong?
It's Russian.