Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    T-90 MBT: News

    Share

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2130
    Points : 2245
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  higurashihougi on Thu Sep 11, 2014 11:42 am

    Vann7 wrote:
    But war is something you do not plan many times , it just Happens.. .  Look at Georgia war in 2008.. did Russia planned that war? No.. it just happened and they had no choice but to send tanks without proper protection
    and get more casualties . And now you have Ukraine.. that are already the radicals bombing Russian territory.. with casualties..  If they start a major genocide ,lets say they bomb Donetsk/Lugansk Chemical industrial Plants it will create a major catastrophe with thousands of civilians killed and probably with RUssia territory also affected forcing Russia to invade to restore order.. not as a planned thing but as a unplanned one..

    So it make no sense why Russia do not use Arena at least on their T-90 tanks.. Today more than ever Tanks will be a more important weapon for Russia even than SUbmarine or warships because of a major war happening in their borders. ,that at any time they could be forced to just like in georgia Invade.

    leaving their T-90 tanks totally unarmed from arena active protection is a really bad choice.. because their Armata will no see action for a least 3 to 5 years in a real war. until they manage to sell it first in enough numbers. It will be ugly if NATO send top attack anti tank weapons in the thousands to Ukraine and they are forced to invade with no defense against top attack weapon .  

    The chance of a war with Russia is low because even a primary schooler with normal IQ can understand that Russia is a massive country with huge military/industrial system with no nearby country can rival. And it has nuclear weapons.

    Even without T-90 Russia can easily swarm the battlefield with thousands of older tanks which easily overwhelmed the enemy. If aiming for a favourable treaty with little or no territorial change for both sides, it would be an easy win for Moskva.

    You have already seen how Moskva took back Krym and liberated Ossetia and the West can do nothing beside the meaningless "sanction".

    Furthermore, people have already seen the true "color" of the so-called colorful "revolutions". Except the facist scums in Kyiv.

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3233
    Points : 3357
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Vann7 on Thu Sep 11, 2014 10:59 pm

    higurashihougi wrote:
    Vann7 wrote:
    But war is something you do not plan many times , it just Happens.. .  Look at Georgia war in 2008.. did Russia planned that war? No.. it just happened and they had no choice but to send tanks without proper protection
    and get more casualties . And now you have Ukraine.. that are already the radicals bombing Russian territory.. with casualties..  If they start a major genocide ,lets say they bomb Donetsk/Lugansk Chemical industrial Plants it will create a major catastrophe with thousands of civilians killed and probably with RUssia territory also affected forcing Russia to invade to restore order.. not as a planned thing but as a unplanned one..

    So it make no sense why Russia do not use Arena at least on their T-90 tanks.. Today more than ever Tanks will be a more important weapon for Russia even than SUbmarine or warships because of a major war happening in their borders. ,that at any time they could be forced to just like in georgia Invade.

    leaving their T-90 tanks totally unarmed from arena active protection is a really bad choice.. because their Armata will no see action for a least 3 to 5 years in a real war. until they manage to sell it first in enough numbers. It will be ugly if NATO send top attack anti tank weapons in the thousands to Ukraine and they are forced to invade with no defense against top attack weapon .  

    The chance of a war with Russia is low because even a primary schooler with normal IQ can understand that Russia is a massive country with huge military/industrial system with no nearby country can rival. And it has nuclear weapons.

    Even without T-90 Russia can easily swarm the battlefield with thousands of older tanks which easily overwhelmed the enemy. If aiming for a favourable treaty with little or no territorial change for both sides, it would be an easy win for Moskva.

    You have already seen how Moskva took back Krym and liberated Ossetia and the West can do nothing beside the meaningless "sanction".

    Furthermore, people have already seen the true "color" of the so-called colorful "revolutions". Except the facist scums in Kyiv.

    Even a primary schooler with normal IQ can understand that Russia even thought have nuclear weapons they cannot use them against their own people in Ukraine. Where is Russia going to use Nuclear weapons in Ukraine?
    The facist junta is luring Russia into a war and if Russia have any hopes to maintain good relations with the defeated Ukrainian army.. using nuclear weapons will be a guarantee to totally lose the civilians support for ever..
    This is why Conventional weapons , Rifles and tanks are also important. You cannot use nukes in a conventional war and Georgia and Ukraine knows that.. this is why Both provoked or are provoking Russia into a war.

    Notice that Russian nukes did not helped Russia in any way with the Chechen wars or Afgan war.. they had to fight conventionally. . Having an army well defended from a conventional war will significantly help to reduce your people casualties.. but if The Russian Army goes to Ukraine forced to restore order.. and NATO arms them with Javelins and spike top attack missiles it will be a massive wipe of Russian T-90 Tanks..for not being propertly defended. and guess what.. Russia cannot use its nuclear weapons against Ukrainians.. about half of its population is either neutral to Russia or pro Russia.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mike E on Fri Sep 12, 2014 12:24 am

    Vann7 wrote:
    higurashihougi wrote:
    Vann7 wrote:
    But war is something you do not plan many times , it just Happens.. .  Look at Georgia war in 2008.. did Russia planned that war? No.. it just happened and they had no choice but to send tanks without proper protection
    and get more casualties . And now you have Ukraine.. that are already the radicals bombing Russian territory.. with casualties..  If they start a major genocide ,lets say they bomb Donetsk/Lugansk Chemical industrial Plants it will create a major catastrophe with thousands of civilians killed and probably with RUssia territory also affected forcing Russia to invade to restore order.. not as a planned thing but as a unplanned one..

    So it make no sense why Russia do not use Arena at least on their T-90 tanks.. Today more than ever Tanks will be a more important weapon for Russia even than SUbmarine or warships because of a major war happening in their borders. ,that at any time they could be forced to just like in georgia Invade.

    leaving their T-90 tanks totally unarmed from arena active protection is a really bad choice.. because their Armata will no see action for a least 3 to 5 years in a real war. until they manage to sell it first in enough numbers. It will be ugly if NATO send top attack anti tank weapons in the thousands to Ukraine and they are forced to invade with no defense against top attack weapon .  

    The chance of a war with Russia is low because even a primary schooler with normal IQ can understand that Russia is a massive country with huge military/industrial system with no nearby country can rival. And it has nuclear weapons.

    Even without T-90 Russia can easily swarm the battlefield with thousands of older tanks which easily overwhelmed the enemy. If aiming for a favourable treaty with little or no territorial change for both sides, it would be an easy win for Moskva.

    You have already seen how Moskva took back Krym and liberated Ossetia and the West can do nothing beside the meaningless "sanction".

    Furthermore, people have already seen the true "color" of the so-called colorful "revolutions". Except the facist scums in Kyiv.

    Even a primary schooler with normal IQ can understand that Russia even thought have nuclear weapons they cannot use them against their own people in Ukraine. Where is Russia going to use Nuclear weapons in Ukraine?
    The facist junta is luring Russia into a war and if Russia have any hopes to maintain good relations with the defeated Ukrainian army.. using nuclear weapons will be a guarantee to totally lose the civilians support for ever..
    This is why Conventional weapons , Rifles and tanks are also important. You cannot use nukes in a conventional war and Georgia and Ukraine knows that.. this is why Both provoked or are provoking Russia into a war.

    Notice that Russian nukes did not helped Russia in any way with the Chechen wars or Afgan war.. they had to fight conventionally. . Having an army well defended from a conventional war will significantly help to reduce your people casualties.. but if The Russian Army goes to Ukraine forced to restore order.. and NATO arms them with Javelins and spike top attack missiles it will be a massive wipe of Russian T-90 Tanks..for not being propertly defended. and guess what.. Russia cannot use its nuclear weapons against Ukrainians.. about half of its population is either neutral to Russia or pro Russia.
    They could conduct tactical strikes on military installations, with much criticism from the hypocritical West...

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Fri Sep 12, 2014 1:24 am

    Vann7 wrote:and NATO arms them with Javelins and spike top attack missiles it will be a massive wipe of Russian T-90 Tanks.

    You cant seriously believe that if those weapons were given to Kiev that it would in any way wipe out any Russian T-90's, when Soviet/Russian ground forces doctrine is to have formidable SHORAD on hand such as Tor-M1/M2's, Igla-1m manpads, Tunguska-M1's, and or stealth/camoflauge kits such as Nakidka, etc., but of course GarryB could explain better than me.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mike E on Fri Sep 12, 2014 2:04 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Vann7 wrote:and NATO arms them with Javelins and spike top attack missiles it will be a massive wipe of Russian T-90 Tanks.

    You cant seriously believe that if those weapons were given to Kiev that it would in any way wipe out any Russian T-90's, when Soviet/Russian ground forces doctrine is to have formidable SHORAD on hand such as Tor-M1/M2's, Igla-1m manpads, Tunguska-M1's, and or stealth/camoflauge kits such as Nakidka, etc., but of course GarryB could explain better than me.
    There are many levels of defense. Not like the Javlin could get in firing range anyway!

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2130
    Points : 2245
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  higurashihougi on Fri Sep 12, 2014 7:33 am

    @Vann: there nuclear weapons is not be used against petty scums like the Kyiv facists. It is used to deliver a message to the West, such as "if you dare to invade Russia, you will pay dearly". That's a poweful message which makes the Western oligarchs think 1000 times before sticking their noses into Russia's affairs.

    But of course, neither Moskva nor Washington would want to use such inhuman weapons because that will mark the end of humankind.

    Second, in Ukraina and Gruziya, Moskva's aim is the independence of the regions which pro-Russia sentiment is dominant, and a treaty which is favourable to Russia but not very harmful to the opponent. Moskva stops at that, wants nothing more. This ensures the conflict is small, not prolonged, and leaves little chance for the Western bullshit to deeply intervene into the event.

    Considering that case, current level of Russian arms is more than enough for the conflict. Especially when we see that Ukraina has a divided population, a corrupted goverment, and a degenerated army.

    Unless the Kyiv facists lost the ability to think rationally and go on with a suicide plan.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  GarryB on Fri Sep 12, 2014 10:08 am

    Lets be clear that the use of nukes in the Ukraine by any side would be very counterproductive.

    So far Javelin has been used against point targets in Iraq and Afghanistan and it seems to be effective against an third world enemy that doesn't know what is coming...

    The Javelin has an IRR seeker so a large sheet of glass would hide a tank from its sensor... making it a command to line of sight weapon... Metis-M1 but much more expensive and about 200mm less armour penetration... and slower.

    The facist junta is luring Russia into a war and if Russia have any hopes to maintain good relations with the defeated Ukrainian army.. using nuclear weapons will be a guarantee to totally lose the civilians support for ever..

    Not an accurate statement.

    They might want to lure Russia into a war where they can be the victim of Russian aggression... but Putin isn't that stupid... he has said all along that the solution is political and not military.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Vympel
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 112
    Points : 118
    Join date : 2013-01-30

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Vympel on Sat Sep 13, 2014 3:53 pm

    General question - the T-90MS has a Sosna-U gunner's thermal sight, right? And this is the same as that on the T-72B3?

    What about the gunner's thermal sight on the T-90A? Is it the ESSA of the T-90S, or is Sosna-U? Or neither? I assumed that the T-90A had the same sight as the T-72B3, but I never looked into it.

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  sepheronx on Sat Sep 13, 2014 4:16 pm

    T-90A has the Catherin XP Thermal so it is ESSA. Although, in the future, it will end up being Sosna-U using the Irbus-K (or whatever it is called) thermal made in Russia.

    Vympel
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 112
    Points : 118
    Join date : 2013-01-30

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Vympel on Sat Sep 13, 2014 4:43 pm

    sepheronx wrote:T-90A has the Catherin XP Thermal so it is ESSA. Although, in the future, it will end up being Sosna-U using the Irbus-K (or whatever it is called) thermal made in Russia.

    Does Sosna-U use the 'Irbus-K' (Irbis?) now?

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    Location : Canada

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  sepheronx on Sat Sep 13, 2014 5:17 pm

    No. I believe it still uses the CatherinXP Thermals. Although, I am pretty certain that Irbis-K is already being released. They said it would be ready last year for production. So if that is the case, I don't see the need for Catherin XP, especially now with France's anti Russian policy.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mike E on Sat Sep 13, 2014 5:23 pm

    sepheronx wrote:No.  I believe it still uses the CatherinXP Thermals.  Although, I am pretty certain that Irbis-K is already being released.  They said it would be ready last year for production.  So if that is the case, I don't see the need for Catherin XP, especially now with France's anti Russian policy.
    Hmm, thanks for the detailed info Sepheronx.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 6086
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Austin on Sun Sep 14, 2014 5:16 pm

    Can some one confirm as shown in video below autoloader of T-90 Tank allows it to load the round and cartridge simultaneously in one single motion ? ( Starts at 0:43 )




    Compare that with loading mechanism of T-72 where round and cartidges are loaded in two round


    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mike E on Sun Sep 14, 2014 6:47 pm

    Hmm, I don't see any reason to doubt it....

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Sep 14, 2014 7:42 pm

    I think that is a T-80 that loads propellant and warhead at the same time.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mike E on Sun Sep 14, 2014 10:06 pm

    Werewolf wrote:I think that is a T-80 that loads propellant and warhead at the same time.
    I thought the T-80 also loaded in the "two parts"....

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Sep 14, 2014 10:23 pm

    Mike E wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:I think that is a T-80 that loads propellant and warhead at the same time.
    I thought the T-80 also loaded in the "two parts"....

    Austin was speaking if the T-90 was loading both propellant and warhead in one reloading cycle not like T-72's which loads seperatley warhead and than propellant.

    And i think that this was a T-80 and i was right. The T-90MS reloads exactly like T-72.

    BTW ignore the title of the video of some factoid boys and "autoloader cut arms" for US fanboys to have some excuses why Abrams has no autoloader.



    Here the T-80.


    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mike E on Sun Sep 14, 2014 11:33 pm

    Wow! Thanks for all that info... Very Happy

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3233
    Points : 3357
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Vann7 on Mon Sep 15, 2014 5:44 am


    Not having no autoloader today is incredibly retarded and not justified..
    The performance of the crew will significantly decrease after a couple of days of fighting ,specially if the crew
    do not have proper rest and no sleep because of the war.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 6086
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Austin on Mon Sep 15, 2014 5:46 am

    Thanks Werewolf

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mike E on Mon Sep 15, 2014 5:47 am

    Vann7 wrote:
    Not having no autoloader today is incredibly retarded and not justified..
    The performance of the crew will significantly decrease after a couple of days of fighting ,specially if the crew
    do not have proper rest and no sleep because of the war.

    It all honesty it depends on the person you are talking to (opinionated). I myself believe that while autoloaders are great, they can fail in which case they are useless... That being said, human loaders are slower, can wear out, and risks yet another life in the process.

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Mon Sep 15, 2014 8:52 am

    Mike E wrote:
    Vann7 wrote:
    Not having no autoloader today is incredibly retarded and not justified..
    The performance of the crew will significantly decrease after a couple of days of fighting ,specially if the crew
    do not have proper rest and no sleep because of the war.

    It all honesty it depends on the person you are talking to (opinionated). I myself believe that while autoloaders are great, they can fail in which case they are useless... That being said, human loaders are slower, can wear out, and risks yet another life in the process.

    Well I'll have to make an analogy here, I would compare 'not' having a autoloader vs 'having' a autoloader with a person who 'runs' from San Diego to New York City, with a person who 'drives' the same journey. There a people who are skilled enough and who happen to be in good enough shape to run that distance, and there are cars that are in bad shape and drivers who are too incompetent (terrible drivers who can't read a map or use GPS) to drive that journey, but the people who are capable of running the journey are few-and-far-between and significantly outnumbered by people who could drive the same journey.

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Mike E on Mon Sep 15, 2014 8:56 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Mike E wrote:
    Vann7 wrote:
    Not having no autoloader today is incredibly retarded and not justified..
    The performance of the crew will significantly decrease after a couple of days of fighting ,specially if the crew
    do not have proper rest and no sleep because of the war.

    It all honesty it depends on the person you are talking to (opinionated). I myself believe that while autoloaders are great, they can fail in which case they are useless... That being said, human loaders are slower, can wear out, and risks yet another life in the process.

    Well I'll have to make an analogy here, I would compare 'not' having a autoloader vs 'having' a autoloader with a person who 'runs' from San Diego to New York City, with a person who 'drives' the same journey. There a people who are skilled enough and who happen to be in good enough shape to run that distance, and there are cars that are in bad shape and drivers who are too incompetent (terrible drivers who can't read a map or use GPS) to drive that journey, but the people who are capable of running the journey are few-and-far-between and significantly outnumbered by people who could drive the same journey.
    Good point, and that is the main problem with ammunition loading via people. Even having half of the process being automated (PZH 2000) is a huge improvement.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Werewolf on Mon Sep 15, 2014 9:52 am

    Autoloaders are far more reliable than human loader. Not only will autoloaders keep up the same reloading time regardless if they drive 30km/h over really rough terrain where a human had to hold himself up right with both hands. If the tank is hit and not penetrated the impact and explosion create a shock wave some people can pass out through the shock, if that is the commander it is not that big of a problem if that is the reloading guy well than you have kind off a problem. The communication of a 4th Soldier is also eleminated with autoloader because the Commander or Gunner has not to tell the Loading soldier what round he has to load next time, they just set it themselfs. Also injuries for loaders are not that uncommon, actually if someone gets hurt inside the tank without enemy involvement than it is most of the time the loading guy, who either jammed his hand somewhere or didn't paid attention and got injured in the loading process or even worse in the tank shell ejection. He has also to stand up right during drive and reload and when the tank is on rough terrain he could get shaked through or hit against some of the metal parts at his "workdesk".

    So yes an autoloader is far better than a soldier for exact this job.

    higurashihougi
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2130
    Points : 2245
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  higurashihougi on Mon Sep 15, 2014 10:01 am

    Werewolf wrote:Autoloaders are far more reliable than human loader. Not only will autoloaders keep up the same reloading time regardless if they drive 30km/h over really rough terrain where a human had to hold himself up right with both hands. If the tank is hit and not penetrated the impact and explosion create a shock wave some people can pass out through the shock, if that is the commander it is not that big of a problem if that is the reloading guy well than you have kind off a problem. The communication of a 4th Soldier is also eleminated with autoloader because the Commander or Gunner has not to tell the Loading soldier what round he has to load next time, they just set it themselfs. Also injuries for loaders are not that uncommon, actually if someone gets hurt inside the tank without enemy involvement than it is most of the time the loading guy, who either jammed his hand somewhere or didn't paid attention and got injured in the loading process or even worse in the tank shell ejection. He has also to stand up right during drive and reload and when the tank is on rough terrain he could get shaked through or hit against some of the metal parts at his "workdesk".

    So yes an autoloader is far better than a soldier for exact this job.

    And an autoloader does not get drunk, does not need coffee, does not protest, does not quite the job, and we do not need to hold a ceremony for a KIA autoloader.

    Not to mention that we need 20-25 years to create a human loader while an autoloader may need less than 1 year to be created.

    After all, technology is meant to do the same or more works with fewer and fewer humans.

    Sponsored content

    Re: T-90 MBT: News

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 12:10 am


      Current date/time is Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:10 am