Why has the T-90M been such a total failure?

Why has the T-90M been such a total failure?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    1. Russians use it moronicly.
    2. Russians store/perform maintenance on it badly (they have FAS).
    3. Russia is dependent on imports of Western electronics to make more. They've been blocked from that.
    4. It was developed badly in the first place due to Russian corruption, as Russians are FAS morons with AIDS.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >1. Russians use it moronicly.
      This applies to most of the shit.

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Webm or link homosexual. This thread has the quality of a /misc/tard bait thread

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's just a T-72 with modest upgrades that do not fix its real problems: bad awareness/sensors and exposed ammo that explodes/burns at the first penetration.
    It's a blind death trap that cannot be fixed because it's too small and has no room for real upgrades.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah no, those are exact things that T-90M fixes. It still hast that horrendous transmission.

      Tanks are obsolete. There were becoming untenable in the 70s but became obsolete in the 80s (inside NATO). The Gulf War made them officially obsolete when the last major tank battle was won by the USAF, ie, it was obvious to everyone that tanks were no longer viable. But, still, there were a lot of copes people clung to ie monkey models, dumb Arabs, etc. But now there’s a peer conflict in Ukraine blatantly showing the world that tanks are hopelessly overmatched by many different weapons including man-portable ATGMs able to casually one-shot any tank anywhere from several kilometers away. China has been mass producing a Javelin clone for a decade now. There’s simply no room on a modern battlefield for a 30+ ton steel beast run by 3-4 highly trained specialists that is casually killed by a mobik carrying a 50-lbs missile system from 4km away. It’s over.

      The only difference between a T-90M and M1A2 is that the crew of a M1A2 is more likely to survive after being immediately knocked out without accomplishing anything.

      Genuine brainlet take

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I thought most of the sensor/protection upgrades planned in the M got canned, notably the hard kill APS?

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Most of its upgrades are useless against drones and mines.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >why isn't the T-72B5 better than all the others?

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Tanks are obsolete. There were becoming untenable in the 70s but became obsolete in the 80s (inside NATO). The Gulf War made them officially obsolete when the last major tank battle was won by the USAF, ie, it was obvious to everyone that tanks were no longer viable. But, still, there were a lot of copes people clung to ie monkey models, dumb Arabs, etc. But now there’s a peer conflict in Ukraine blatantly showing the world that tanks are hopelessly overmatched by many different weapons including man-portable ATGMs able to casually one-shot any tank anywhere from several kilometers away. China has been mass producing a Javelin clone for a decade now. There’s simply no room on a modern battlefield for a 30+ ton steel beast run by 3-4 highly trained specialists that is casually killed by a mobik carrying a 50-lbs missile system from 4km away. It’s over.

    The only difference between a T-90M and M1A2 is that the crew of a M1A2 is more likely to survive after being immediately knocked out without accomplishing anything.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >conveniently forgets 73 Easting
      >ignores the fact that only the top 5% of militaries can afford a proper airforce
      >ignores the fact that only the US has proven and capable SEAD/DEAD abilities that allow total air supremacy
      >ignores the fact that armor/anti-armor technologies are constantly leapfrogging themselves in terms of capability
      >ignores the fact that ziggers and Ukies can't into combined arms
      Other than these points you are absolutely correct and, in fact, not a complete fricking moron.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >only the top 5% of militaries can afford a proper airforce
        even drones can make tanks shit and piss themselves now
        tanks simply are far less safe than they used to be, making them basically good for advancing against an enemy that's already beaten and that's about it

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Shut the frick up you moronic homosexual.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      tired trope that was rinsed and repeated since the 70's with the sagger during the yom kippur war. Guess what tech evolves and countermeasures are developed. It's a armor v weapon race that has been going on since medieval times that has no signs of it ending. what Ukraine showed everyone that tanks from the last 30+ years are very vulnerable to drones and new countermeasures are I'm sure being R&Ded right now
      >tl;dr same homosexual different era

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >what is APS
      >what is drone jamming

      Merkavas are doing great despite all the screeching. Every major country on earth is investing in tanks.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Everyone claiming tanks are obsolete remind me of really bad strategy game players.
        No, you can't just stack 15 T-72s, fast move them down a road and expect not to get instantly vaporized by the entire enemy team coordinating fire.
        Tanks are much more effective in pairs of one or two, with whatever extra tanks in reserve positions. That way you can keep up a constant rate of fire by cycling tanks in and out, and if ever the enemy goes ham and calls in the big guns, you only ever risk losing 1 or 2 vehicles.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >muh game is the same as irl

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >is the same as irl
            Absolutely hilarious when "tanks are obsolete" morons don't serve anywhere Irl, never fought in modern war, don't listen to anyone actually fighting in a war but building ideas based on short clips they see on internet

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >opinions based on webms are less credible than opinions based on video games
              Wrong board

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                https://i.imgur.com/kGmzsoK.png

                >muh game is the same as irl

                Am I wrong? Is doomstacking T-72s actually gloriously successful? Is a strategy game that specifically focuses on combined arms warfare not at the very least mildly representative of how combined arms warfare would play out?
                If you want an example from the 2023 Summer Offensive, one of the main armor killers were KA-52s. Ukies doomstacked some Bradleys and Leos, sent them out into a field and got wrecked simultaneously by mines, artillery, infantry, ATGMs and the aforementioned KA-52s.
                You have to defeat every threat simultaneously if ever you hope to advance.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yes you are wrong

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >its just like my hecking vidya gayme!!!!1!
                Kys

                You guys are fricking emotional. Get a grip on yourself.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >its just like my hecking vidya gayme!!!!1!
                Kys

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                All matter in the universe that isn't hydrogen was made in a star once. It's called nuclear fusion, you moron.
                The stars die but don't necesserily explode, releasing most of the matter.
                But it's also somewhat cyclical.
                A 2nd generation star is born from the matter of a 1st gen star, fusing more complex elements to together. Repeat that once more and you get 3rd gen stars, like our Sun.
                So not only are you made for "Star Dust" as its called, the matter that you'e made of was created through multiple generations of stars.

                Everything you can touch, all matter except Hydrogen comes from the fusion inside the core of a burning star.
                I don't know why you're mad or seething at this realisation.
                You'd rather think magic sky santa clapped his hands and materialize your monkey ass out of thin air?
                I smell your seething christardness through your post.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous
              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Your first sentence is wrong. Look up primordial nucleosynthesis. Most of the universes helium was formed very early in the universes history, before the first stars.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Tanks are obsolete. There were becoming untenable in the eraly 40s but became obsolete in the late war (inside Germany). Barbarossa made them officially obsolete when the last major tank battle was won by Germany, ie, it was obvious to everyone that tanks were no longer viable. But, still, there were a lot of copes people clung to ie monkey models, dumb Russian generals, etc. But now there’s a peer conflict in the western front blatantly showing the world that tanks are hopelessly overmatched by many different weapons including AT cannons able to casually one-shot any tank anywhere from several kilometers away. Germany has been mass producing a At cannons for a decade now. There’s simply no room on a modern battlefield for a 30+ ton steel beast run by 3-4 highly trained specialists that is casually killed by a mobik carrying a 50-lbs AT gun system or a AT gun from 4km away. It’s over.
                >The only difference between a Tiger and Sherman is that the crew of a Sherman is more likely to survive after being immediately knocked out without accomplishing anything.
                you see why people think you guys are moronic

                https://i.imgur.com/9AraYjv.jpeg

                >opinions based on webms are less credible than opinions based on video games
                Wrong board

                >your sky daddy and his book scribbled by desert goat herders is wrong.
                >my crippled daddy in wheelchair said big bang happened millions of years ago which we have no proof or records or ways of proving
                I find it funny that people who speak in extremes are so fricking dense, they are so self righteous with 0 self awareness.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >1+1 = 0
                >1+1 = 2
                I find it funny that people who speak in extremes are so fricking dense, they are so self righteous with 0 self awareness.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >theory is an established fact
                WOW anon. Tell us more. I insist.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >gravity isn't real because mohammed said so
                >gravity is real even if this model has some discrepancies with reality
                I find it funny that people who speak in extremes are so fricking dense, they are so self righteous with 0 self awareness.
                better now?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Do I look like defending sky daddy or ridiculing both sides?
                Doesn't matter. Your angry assumptions are amsuing. Please, continue.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >OP is a homosexual because god said so
                >OP is a homosexual because he made this thread
                I find it funny that people who speak in extremes both agree that OP is a homosexual.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                why false dichotomy?
                Big Bang is a Christian idea thought up by some priest of all people
                funny world

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                To create a skellington from scratch, you must first invent the spoopyverse.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >>what is APS
        In the best case, a way to make the enemy waste a few drones exhausting it before they can start hitting your tank.
        >>what is drone jamming
        Increasingly irrelevant.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >>>what is drone jamming
          >Increasingly irrelevant.

          >I have no counter to the fact that western jamming makes drones a non-issue, so I will instead handwave it away

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >I have no answer
            The webbum is his answer and you didn't get it

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Merkavas are doing great
        Against starving 70 IQ people whos culture is based around an imaginery friend in the sky that will get them pussy.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >planes get blown up in war: need moar
      >boats get blown up in war: need moar
      >incels get blown in up war: need moar
      >tanks get blown up in war: TANKS ARE OBSOLETE :B

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I'll believe the tank is obselete when someone shows me another weapons system that can do the same job better or alternatively prove that the jobs tanks do are no longer required on the modern battlefield
      Until then, the tank remains the apex predator of the combat ground vehicle ecosystem

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        IFVs.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Tanks are obsolete. There were becoming untenable in the eraly 40s but became obsolete in the late war (inside Germany). Barbarossa made them officially obsolete when the last major tank battle was won by Germany, ie, it was obvious to everyone that tanks were no longer viable. But, still, there were a lot of copes people clung to ie monkey models, dumb Russian generals, etc. But now there’s a peer conflict in the western front blatantly showing the world that tanks are hopelessly overmatched by many different weapons including AT cannons able to casually one-shot any tank anywhere from several kilometers away. Germany has been mass producing a At cannons for a decade now. There’s simply no room on a modern battlefield for a 30+ ton steel beast run by 3-4 highly trained specialists that is casually killed by a mobik carrying a 50-lbs AT gun system or a AT gun from 4km away. It’s over.
      >The only difference between a Tiger and Sherman is that the crew of a Sherman is more likely to survive after being immediately knocked out without accomplishing anything.
      you see why people think you guys are moronic

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ukrainian T-64 are unironically better than this piece of junk and I think that is poetic.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It still cannot reverse. This is not a war of massed armored pushes mounted by the Warsaw Pact. This is one nation trying to put a few tanks at a time into a tactical fight, and lacking the mobility to disengage where needed. Tanks enter a battle and they either win or die. It's basically a coin flip.
    All the valid complaints about ammunition storage are secondary to the fact that tanks should not be taking hits in the first place.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because the T72 was a failure. Apparently upgrading a decent tank (T80) was just too fricking complicated (it really wasn't).

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      T90 is superior to T80 though.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    it's fine. Just don't get hit

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    does the M stand for mediocre?

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >This thread for the 10th time this week
    Im convinced this is a street shitter mad that Poos bought T-90s instead of Ukraines T-80s like Pakistan and now theyre stuck with shit boxes

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yhe think hell I even expect a redeffect vid about how the T-90M isint shit compared to other tanks as a cope section

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because it’s in a war where tanks have been shown to be mostly obsolete. If you replaced every Russian tank with a clapped out Abrams tank the losses wouldn’t be much less. Armor just isn’t viable on a modern battlefield, in fact most Western tanks that have been sent have now been destroyed. All of the British Challengers were destroyed in less than two weeks. I can’t imagine any other Western tank faired much better.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I'm sorry noone replied to your pathetic bait anon. have a pity (you)

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      this
      leopards 2A6 and abrams got annihilated too and using cheap ass drones. Tanks weren't made to resists attacks from above. That's why every country will have its own turtle tank sooner or later and all fights will be between turtles

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The only confirmed Leo and Abrams kills we've seen were done by mines and ATGMs. Stop lying out of your ass.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Who's we ? I distinctly remember a Leo getting struck by a fpv drone while firing on the move and causing ammo to cook off, go through the oryx list if you don't believe me
          Why wouldn't they be vulnerable too? They carry rpg-7 warheads, there is not a single tank in existence that can take a top down rpg-7 or a back of the turret or engine,etc without getting penned

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    what the actual frick is that construction on top

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Modified cope cage to retain hatch function, looks like some sort of EW shit bolted on top.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Evolved cope cage, anti-FPV covers and jamming equipment.

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's just a T-72 with more shit on the turret

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Why has the T-90M been such a total failure?
    it's just a t72 really

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >butthurt troll thread
    How many towns fell this time?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      How many days to Kyiiv?
      How many tanks left in storage?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >How many days to Kyiiv?
        2 more weeks.
        >How many tanks left in storage?
        There are still many T-44, IS-3, T-34, KV-1, BT-7, T-26 and T-18.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >T-44, IS-3, T-34, KV-1, BT-7, T-26 and T-18.
          I fricking wish there were

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >There are still many T-44, IS-3, T-34, KV-1, BT-7, T-26 and T-18.

          One of my wishes in my bucket list is to visit the Kubinka tank museum, with tanks inside if possible.

          Don't give them ideas, their stupidity has already cost us a good number of prototypes

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      you can take any russian armored vehicle subtype and have more visually confirmed kills than those

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It's incredible how many Russian vehicles Ukraine has captured, even just from the Great Abandoonment alone.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      How is the 3 day to Kharkiv offensive doing?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Belgorod got bombed by BBC Puccia again.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      21? really is that all? several vehicles appear to be repeats too

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They can't use any of these captured vehicles anyway which makes it even more pathetic. They wasted resources just to bring them back to Russia.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Western countries put captured/destroyed emergency vehicles like ambulances and some despaired russian tanks in some cities in western countries to drum up support and solicit donations. Russia saw that and did their own thing once they feel like they captured enough Western armor. What Z gays can’t conceptualists is the amount of russians that died to bring campyured armor into moscow is at a greater level than the amount of ukrainians that died to bring some T-90s or whatever to some square in the EU. Think how long it took for Russia to finally capture a disabled Bradley.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            They're literally too dense to understand why lots of things are embarrassing when they so it despite Ukraine having already done it everything is 1 to 1 to them

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >embarrassing when they so it despite Ukraine

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        oryx says more (if we are including all donated western vehicles combined), but not much more

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Certainly not enough for Russia to equip itself with like Ukraine did.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >bambuzled /chug/er
      How many Kharkivs was taken this morning?

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This war has been going for over 2 years and ziggers still haven’t fielded the mighty Armata. Sad.

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I didn't realize how much of a piece of shit the T-90 was until I found out the turret bustle can't be accessed from inside the turret. When people say the t-90 is a t-72 with some garbage slapped onto it in order to make it look like a real tank, they aren't joking or exaggerating. The only reason we don't see t-90's blowing up just as often as t-72's is because the Russians have so few of them.

  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    hardly any tanks have performed outstandingly in this war, but the T-90M is, at the end of the day, just a T-72 with some extra bits and pieces, it has the same core flaws, namely the ammo carousel and atrocious reverse speed, no amount of ERA or cope cages will ever fix those fundamental flaws, the T-72 is a design that reached its practical limits ages ago, but russia really doesnt have the funds or infrastructure to make anything else, so they just keep making or restoring T-72s with different upgrade packages

    the biggest irony here is the soviet stockpile, see even Ukraine developed some new vehicles after the fall of the USSR, because they didnt really care about scrapping old soviet shit to make something new, but not russia, time and time again they rejected proposal for new designs and picked upgrade packages instead, thats how you end up with shit like the BTR-82A or the fricking T-62MV Obr. 2022

    that stockpile was like shackles that hindered the decision making process in russia, and yet, that same stockpile is being completely destroyed in Ukraine, its unlikely to even exist anymore within the next 1-2 years, so at the end of all this, russia wont have neither a stockpile, nor actual good post-soviet vehicle designs

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >it has the same core flaws, namely the ammo carousel and atrocious reverse speed
      Add the dogshit ergonomics and visibility so bad that some crews managed to get lost during the fricking tank biathlon nevermind actual combat

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      France's enormous stockpile of FTs had a similar stifling effect on their army in the interwar era, with the Char D2 having a turret that was backwards compatible with the FT-17.

  21. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I just want to be clear, this kind of common failure is not typical. they don't typically do that.

  22. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Can someone explain why Ukraine only got 31 Abrams? It seems like if they got more, we would at least see some more footage, perhaps more tank on tank battles, to better analyse their performance

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Abrams were only sent to Ukraine in order to get Scholz to OK sending Leopards

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        But why dont they give more Abrams away. They gave 10% if not less of what Germany provided and they have 8100 tanks in total. Surely they could provide more

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Small indie country, please understand.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      apparently the problem is the armour
      all the stored Abrams hulls out there in the desert were upgraded (at incredible expense) with the fancy armour that means they cannot, by law, be exported from the United States
      How ironic that the biggest hindrance to killing Russians with Abrams tanks is the Americans own obsession with making sure said tanks are as good at killing Russians as possible

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Okay, sure. But USA produces around 135 new Abrams tanks per year. Could they not adjust production to make versions that they could export?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          that's exactly what they are doing
          The reason you see so much footage of the abrams in action is because the ukies know they have a guaranteed supply of replacement tanks in the form of those aforementioned new builds
          It may seem like just a trickle when compared to the incredible number of hulls in storage but it is a very steady trickle, which allows the ukies to use their abrams in far riskier plays than they could justify with challengers or leopards

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Thing is, I barely seen Abrams footage. Afterall they only got 30 something tanks. Has US made promises to supply more?

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              the situation as I understand it is that the US guarantees the supply of abrams to a certain level, presumably with intent to expand this level as production increases
              So the ukie supply of tanks never goes above thirty or sixty or whatever it is, but also never drops below that number for long

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >all the stored Abrams hulls out there in the desert were upgraded (at incredible expense) with the fancy armour that means they cannot, by law, be exported from the United States
        I've seen this claim before, but is there an actual source that says this was the issue? In any case, there's no reason they couldn't have put language in any of the aid bills they've passed to say that exporting the good Abrams to Ukraine is specifically authorized.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          There are certain armor types (such as & especially depleted uranium armor, exotic ceramic, etc.) that are, by U.S. law, not available for export to anybody, primarily so the technology doesn't get distributed into the wild with examples getting sold or captured. How else to explain that? It is the LAW, which can only be changed by Congress & signed off by the President. Use a search engine if you want to find and read the exact law.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >There are certain armor types (such as & especially depleted uranium armor, exotic ceramic, etc.) that are, by U.S. law, not available for export to anybody, primarily so the technology doesn't get distributed into the wild with examples getting sold or captured.
            Again, this seems plausible, but I'd like a source. Specifically, a source that says this is why Ukraine didn't get up-armored Abrams tanks.
            >It is the LAW, which can only be changed by Congress & signed off by the President.
            You've described the very basic process of a bill becoming a law, but again, any of the aid bills to Ukraine could have changed the law so that there would be no impedement to them getting the best Abrams tanks.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Its not much of a source but here
              >https://www.twz.com/m1-abrams-tanks-in-u-s-inventory-have-armor-too-secret-to-send-to-ukraine
              If you want more I suggest you take some keywords from that article and go pay a visit to our mutual freind Google-dono

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Maintains enormous stockpile of hardware for a potential war with Russia
        >Refuses to use most of it in an actual war with Russia

  23. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Look at all the horseshit welded on top. This is revolting, Russians are fricking abhuman.

  24. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Just an upgrade kit for old T-72
    >The best and most meaningful upgrade in said kit is just the thermal sights being moved so the gunner would not twist their neck when using them

  25. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because it's Russian.

  26. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Isn't it just a Russian attempt at turning a T-72 into a modern western MBT?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      An utterly failed attempt, yes.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *