T-90 Main Battle Tank #2

GarryB wrote:The thing is that for enemy fire to reach the T-90s ammo it needs to penetrate into the turret and reach the armoured autoloader

And how exactly will the T-90 draw first blood? The length of the Russian 3BM59/3BM60 Svinets-1/2 is not really good. The projectile is about 730mm long, which is much shorter than the M829A3 930mm. The Svinets-1/2 from Russia has one of the weakest penetrations among the APFSDS rounds used by the modern main battle tanks of the major countries, and Russia has made very few of them.

RTN wrote:
And how exactly will the T-90 draw first blood?  The length of the Russian 3BM59/3BM60 Svinets-1/2 is not really good. The projectile is about 730mm long, which is much shorter than the M829A3 930mm. The Svinets-1/2 from Russia has one of the weakest penetrations among the APFSDS rounds used by the modern main battle tanks of the major countries, and Russia has made very few of them.

Houthis destroyed M1 with rpg29 , FPV drones wrecked Leo 2

T90 can be destroyed equally by any number of munitions

It's stupid to think the fate of major wars/battles will be determined by two forces just running into each other with no other factors influencing the outcome

But then again, US generals who planned the Ukro counteroffensive really expected 9 brigades to just charge into trenches and drive 200+km to Crimea

So it's clear you are not the only one who thinks that way , and that's a good thing

You have no idea what you're talking about, the M829A3 is 730mm long.

And how exactly will the T-90 draw first blood?

The T-90 can hit stationary targets at 5km range while moving down a road, they showed that on Combat Approved. It can also fire a guided missile that will enable it to hit targets at long range that are moving... moving targets mean accuracy is no longer good enough to ensure hits.

The length of the Russian 3BM59/3BM60 Svinets-1/2 is not really good. The projectile is about 730mm long, which is much shorter than the M829A3 930mm.

It is long enough to penetrate all the western vehicles deployed to the Ukraine conflict, which means it is better than bigger western rounds because there is no prize for over penetration.

Being smaller means it is lighter and cheaper and easier to load into the autoloader.

But then the west loves their expensive uber weapons.

The Svinets-1/2 from Russia has one of the weakest penetrations among the APFSDS rounds used by the modern main battle tanks of the major countries, and Russia has made very few of them.

Svinets is from the late 1980s, it might be a common round but it wont be their best... but why would they need their best against Challenger 2 tanks and Abrams tanks and Leopard 1 and Leopard 2 tanks in ridiculously tiny numbers?

Winning a war is great, but doing it on a budget is even better.... remember the plan was to destroy the Russian military and the Russian economy... and they have clearly done neither.

So it's clear you are not the only one who thinks that way , and that's a good thing

The western myth of invincibility makes them easier to deal with, but who knows what they will do when reality sets in and they realise they have to replace everything and rebuild and the only way they could possibly do that is put all the western MIC directors and CEOs in jail for treason.

But of course you can't eliminate western corruption because it takes two to tango and western politicians and high up military people encourage it because when they retire from their government jobs they are looking forward to nice cushy well paid jobs in the private sector getting contracts for companies that don't deserve them... at the end of the day it is the US taxpayer and the US soldier and sailor and airman that are getting shafted and they have no voice.

You have no idea what you're talking about, the M829A3 is 730mm long.

And that is how their myths are created because people (like me) attack the relevance of their numbers rather than the accuracy... which is clearly also a fail... thanks.

RTN wrote:
And how exactly will the T-90 draw first blood?  The length of the Russian 3BM59/3BM60 Svinets-1/2 is not really good. The projectile is about 730mm long, which is much shorter than the M829A3 930mm. The Svinets-1/2 from Russia has one of the weakest penetrations among the APFSDS rounds used by the modern main battle tanks of the major countries, and Russia has made very few of them.

Don't need to. The hull front armor of NATO MBTs is significantly weaker compared to the turret face. In most cases the 3BM42 subcaliber is more than adequate but against the latest with upgraded hull armor the 3BM59/60 subcaliber is more than enough.

Which is fucked because NATO MBTs have lots of energetics just sitting behind that weak armor. The Leopard 2 famously stores 27 main gun rounds to the left of the driver while the Aybraps has 1000L of fuel surrounding the driver in the bow fuel tanks. All with zero compartmentalization.

Russian gunners just need to adjust their aim slightly lower and they would still kill NATO MBTs no problem.

You can't even argue that these can be hidden using hull down positions as any MBT that keeps behind low cover instead of staying mobile runs higher risks of getting ventilated by artillery or FPVs.

GarryB wrote:Svinets is from the late 1980s, it might be a common round but it wont be their best... but why would they need their best against Challenger 2 tanks and Abrams tanks and Leopard 1 and Leopard 2 tanks in ridiculously tiny numbers?

Which round will replace Syinet? Armata has not yet received a new round.

RTN wrote:Which round will replace Syinet? Armata has not yet received a new round.

3BM59/60 replace old 3BM46/48 ROUNDS...


Russians made 3BM69/70 Vaccum for 2A82 T14 tank gun..

Armata its not  tank its platform for 3 vehicle types T14/15/16 for frck sake...

Which round will replace Syinet? Armata has not yet received a new round.

So you were just fishing for information...

OK... a Man says he is grateful about two facts regarding his wife.... first that she is satisfied with 9 inches and second that she doesn't know how to correctly use a ruler to measure things.

Bradley f.ck up T90M in Avdeevka...i do not get it were f.king commander looking in that tank to not see f.king bradley 100m or less front of him...were are rusdians drones to help this tank with enemy targets...nore and more stupidity from Russians every day...


https://t.me/istocna_diskusija/185058

It came under attack from at least three Bradleys working at it from 3 directions, ate a TOW point blank and came out with a malfunctioning turret with the crew likely surviving in the aftermath. Tough fucking beast.

So that's why that one vid of a Bradley graveyard is filled with vehicles that looked to have been gutted by an angry demon fist. Turns out the Bradley's armor is paper to an OF26 shell - and the are just bumrushing these junks at T-90Ms hoping to make a kill somehow.

lyle6 wrote:It came under attack from at least three Bradleys working at it from 3 directions, ate a TOW point blank and came out with a malfunctioning turret with the crew likely surviving in the aftermath. Tough fucking beast.

So that's why that one vid of a Bradley graveyard is filled with vehicles that looked to have been gutted by an angry demon fist. Turns out the Bradley's armor is paper to an OF26 shell - and the are just bumrushing these junks at T-90Ms hoping to make a kill somehow.

We do not see end what happend with tank and his crew..and yes he wistand lot of shit coming on him...but still its a stupid to send tank to clean houses and enemy positions without IFV to cover him from flanks...

Probably bradeley was hiding. You can't see through houses.

With the last articles about prices of nato munitions, it sepnd more dollars firing those shells than russians will to repair the tank.

And the bradley was for sure hunted by drones the next hour.

Such videos are always edited to follow their agenda... if you don't see it drive away to safety there is a reason for that... and it is not that it didn't, it is to create the impression that it didn't.

Having IFVs escorting a tank?

Don't you mean a terminator?

galicije83 wrote:
We do not see end what happend with tank and his crew..and yes he wistand lot of shit coming on him...but still its a stupid to send tank to clean houses and enemy positions without IFV to cover him from flanks...

Even stupider to have IFVs tangling with MBTs that can one-shot them at any range. Where are the Ukrainian tanks that are supposed to screen for the IFVs?  

The Russians made the right call here, the hohols just lucked out. But repeat this scenario 10 times and the hohols would be massacred 9 times out of 10.

It looks like the optics or turret drive was damaged; the main thing is that the crew survived

Stuff's literally steel and explosives. Two things Russia has in abundance like water and oil.

It won't take long but eventually every Russian MBT will be fitted with a complete suite of ERA pagodas making them nearly impervious to the most common cumulative warhead threats from any conceivable angle.