+36

jhelb

RTN

Sujoy

TMA1

Mig-31BM2 Super Irbis-E

The-thing-next-door

Robert.V

Scorpius

limb

MMBR

Krepost

lyle6

ALAMO

lancelot

franco

Backman

walle83

George1

flamming_python

Rodion_Romanovic

PapaDragon

0nillie0

Hole

Isos

Walther von Oldenburg

miketheterrible

magnumcromagnon

collegeboy16

a89

Cyberspec

Pugnax

TR1

Zivo

GarryB

runaway

KomissarBojanchev

40 posters

Go to page :

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

T-62s in Russian Army

runaway

runaway: Posts : 417
Points : 430
Join date : 2010-11-12
Location : Sweden

Post n°51

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

runaway Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:59 pm

[quote="GarryB"]

Soviet T-62 tank, firing from (smoothbore) cannon at a range of 1000 meters against a target moving 19 km/h, was rated to have a first-round hit probability of 70% when firing a kinetic (APFSDS) projectile.

Under the same conditions, it could expect 25% when firing HEAT round.[7] This affects combat on open battlefield with long lines of sight; the same T-62 could expect a 70% first-round hit probability using HEAT rounds on target at 500 meters.

The [7] suggests a note, how about letting us see that quote?

7.^ Jane's Armour and Artillery 1981–82, p. 55.

The gunners sight is not wielded to the main gun... the gunner can continue to follow the target... the gunners sight is able to move independently from the gun barrel, and even the T-62 has two plane gun stabilisation and a stabilised gunners sight...

We are not talking about moving 60 degrees to reload and then having to move 60 degrees back to fire...

The T-62's main gun is the 115mm U-5TS smoothbore. Because of the length of the shell, the main gun elevates after each recoil. This, coupled with the complicated fire control system, means the tank can maintain a rate of only four to five rounds per minute, as opposed to Centurions 10 r/m.

Also, the turret cannot be traversed during the loading sequence. This combination of drawbacks made the T-62 particularly vulnerable to Israeli tanks during the 1973 Yom Kippur War and the 1982 invasion of Lebanon.

The 115mm 3BM-6 APFSDS-T has a muzzle velocity of 1,680 m/s and its maximum effective range is 3,000 m, although most accounts of effective combat range mention 1,500 m. The official direct-fire range against a target 2 m high is 1,870 m, while against a 3 m tall target it is 2,260 m.

Janes

And guys, iam sorry i was offensive and abit abusive, but to call my writing HEAT inferior in hit probability vs APFSDS for Rubbish sent me spinning. You really should have said you meant a specific round and year. welcome

GarryB

GarryB: Posts : 40538
Points : 41038
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand

Post n°52

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

GarryB Tue Jan 15, 2013 10:42 am

7.^ Jane's Armour and Artillery 1981–82, p. 55.

Sorry, but I think modern sources of information based on real inside knowledge are rather more valuable and believable than western estimates from the early 1980s where most "information" was estimate and guesswork and mainly opinion.

The T-62's main gun is the 115mm U-5TS smoothbore. Because of the length of the shell, the main gun elevates after each recoil. This, coupled with the complicated fire control system, means the tank can maintain a rate of only four to five rounds per minute, as opposed to Centurions 10 r/m.

As I said above... rate of fire is only part of the puzzle and is really only important if you intend to miss a lot.

Rates of fire are relative... even with a rate of fire of 20 rounds per minute does that mean the tank will even see 20 targets worth shooting at and engage them all in a single minute?

Most tank tactics I have read about involve moving from covered position to covered position... firing and then moving... where possible moving through dead ground with no line of sight of the enemy to another position to fire from.

Also, the turret cannot be traversed during the loading sequence. This combination of drawbacks made the T-62 particularly vulnerable to Israeli tanks during the 1973 Yom Kippur War and the 1982 invasion of Lebanon.

And yet they were happy to use captured T-62s themselves... that is a bit odd isn't it?

The 115mm 3BM-6 APFSDS-T has a muzzle velocity of 1,680 m/s and its maximum effective range is 3,000 m, although most accounts of effective combat range mention 1,500 m. The official direct-fire range against a target 2 m high is 1,870 m, while against a 3 m tall target it is 2,260 m.

These facts are empty.

I would assume that these are the results of Israeli testing of captured tanks and captured ammo, which is unlikely to be that much like Soviet tanks and Soviet ammo.

How can we tell how accurate Soviet HEAT rounds are based on Israeli results with Arab tanks that may not have even been issued with Soviet standard HEAT rounds?

I have a very low opinion of JANES... except their articles on SAMs written by a certain American expert (SOC).

They like to cut and paste... for several decades the Stechkin was a heavy obsolete weapon that was not effective, yet from every Russian source it was a highly desirable and effective weapon, yet even in the 1990s it was the same entry... heavy and obsolete and the writer couldn't understand why such a backwards and useless weapon was in a modern army. No comments when HK VP-70Z pistols and Glocks with 3 round burst fire capability were developed, or when various machine pistol replacements for the Stechkin were revealed.

And guys, iam sorry i was offensive and abit abusive, but to call my writing HEAT inferior in hit probability vs APFSDS for Rubbish sent me spinning. You really should have said you meant a specific round and year.

My apologies... For much of my life I had very little access to Russian sources and not being able to read or speak Russian I have relied on translations and interpretations from western experts who now seem to have had the mantra that if it sounds too good to be true it is propaganda, and if it sounds bad then it must be the truth. Therefore heavy ERA that will stop APFSDS rounds is a myth and the T-64 eats the arms of 10 tank gunners before breakfast every day is truth.

The other myth is that the way the west does things is the right way and therefore anything the Russians try that is not the wests way is wrong... the west loves APFSDS rounds so if the Russians perferred HEAT for a while then they must be wrong.

Equally the west has invested a lot of time and money in solid rocket fuels for ballistic missiles, so if the Russians are making liquid fuelled missiles it is because they are backward or have some problem. of course this ignores the benefits of liquid fuel... cheaper, more powerful, fully storable for the life of the missile just like solid fuel... and allows the much easier and safer handling of empty missiles with fuelling in place.

runaway

runaway: Posts : 417
Points : 430
Join date : 2010-11-12
Location : Sweden

Post n°53

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

runaway Thu Jan 17, 2013 7:34 pm

As I said above... rate of fire is only part of the puzzle and is really only important if you intend to miss a lot.

Rates of fire are relative... even with a rate of fire of 20 rounds per minute does that mean the tank will even see 20 targets worth shooting at and engage them all in a single minute?

Well, its no drawback to being able to have 20 tanks firing 10r/min, makes 200r/min against a 20 strong force of tanks which fires 4r/min, makes 60r/min. Other factors are of course detection, battlemanagement and hitting. But with 200 vs 60 r/min, thats certainly an advantage.

And yet they were happy to use captured T-62s themselves... that is a bit odd isn't it?

Not really, they modified it, removing the 115mm for the 105mm. Called it Tiran 6,and enhanced armor protection. I dont however know if the reload sequence with a non moving turret during reload was changed.

interpretations from western experts who now seem to have had the mantra that if it sounds too good to be true it is propaganda, and if it sounds bad then it must be the truth. Therefore heavy ERA that will stop APFSDS rounds is a myth and the T-64 eats the arms of 10 tank gunners before breakfast every day is truth.

The other myth is that the way the west does things is the right way and therefore anything the Russians try that is not the wests way is wrong... the west loves APFSDS rounds so if the Russians perferred HEAT for a while then they must be wrong.

Agree, the West has always underestimated russian arms, as did Hitler, and he paid the prize.
But still, some arms hasnt been a succes, and the T-62 is one of them. In case of western arms there has also been less succesful machines. The M551 Sheridan for example, is probably amongst the worst tanks/IFV´s ever imposed on an army.

I standby my opinion that the T-62 wasnt a succes, the 115mm gun was.

TR1

TR1: Posts : 5435
Points : 5433
Join date : 2011-12-06

Post n°54

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

TR1 Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:59 am

They kept plenty of T-62s with 115mm - plus the 105 conversion is obviously due to ammunition standardization, not really performance.

Also, not all 105mms are the same Wink

.

Comparing T-62 to Sheridian is absurd.

T-62 served successfully in many wars, was respect by its opponents, when properly used did very well, served WELL past its time, and was produced in massive numbers.
Like I said, its like calling every Western tank a failure, since many of them had even worse armor.

GarryB

GarryB: Posts : 40538
Points : 41038
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand

Post n°55

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

GarryB Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:03 am

But with 200 vs 60 r/min, thats certainly an advantage.

Rate of fire to a tank is like rate of fire to a sniper.

Unless you are get caught in a time warp or are intending fighting thousands of Chinese tanks then rate of fire is not that important.

Modern tanks have very large rounds which limits the number they can carry at once. The winner wont be the vehicle that fires the most, it will be the one that hits accurately first.

Not really, they modified it, removing the 115mm for the 105mm. Called it Tiran 6,and enhanced armor protection. I dont however know if the reload sequence with a non moving turret during reload was changed.

Actually they evaluated the 115mm gun as being very good and kept them till their supplies of captured ammo were used up before replacing them.

I standby my opinion that the T-62 wasnt a succes, the 115mm gun was.

Well then, you would have to ask yourself why they are only withdrawing them now. You'd also have to ask why take them to Afghanistan, why take them to Georgia?

The Sheridan was not a great tank, but it was an adequate tank in comparison with other tanks operated by air borne forces.

The thing that ruined the Sheridan was its gun/missile system.

The huge irony of course is that the Sheridan made the top 10 worlds best tanks on the History channel, which just goes to show how biased and one eyed western experts really are...

I standby my opinion that the T-62 wasnt a succes, the 115mm gun was.

I will respect your right to that opinion even if I disagree.

runaway

runaway: Posts : 417
Points : 430
Join date : 2010-11-12
Location : Sweden

Post n°56

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

runaway Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:12 am

TR1 wrote:Comparing T-62 to Sheridian is absurd.

I didnt. I said the T-62 wasnt a succes, but it was a well balanced tank for its time, the Sheridan however was a huge failure.

runaway

runaway: Posts : 417
Points : 430
Join date : 2010-11-12
Location : Sweden

Post n°57

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

runaway Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:24 am

GarryB wrote:Modern tanks have very large rounds which limits the number they can carry at once. The winner wont be the vehicle that fires the most, it will be the one that hits accurately first..

Agree, modern tanks. Although it wont be a disadvantage to be able to fire quickly rather than slowly.

Actually they evaluated the 115mm gun as being very good and kept them till their supplies of captured ammo were used up before replacing them.

Yes, and they also uparmored, changed engine and radios, so it was a good tank, not great, but good.

Well then, you would have to ask yourself why they are only withdrawing them now. You'd also have to ask why take them to Afghanistan, why take them to Georgia?

As a well balanced tank of its time, it could certainly do the job as fire support against gerillas. And vs Georgia it was attached to motor rifle brigades, also in the role of infantry support. I dont think they wanted to go tank battling with T-72s.

The huge irony of course is that the Sheridan made the top 10 worlds best tanks on the History channel, which just goes to show how biased and one eyed western experts really are....

Totally agree, it would be much more interesting to see a Russian version of top 10 tanks..

I will respect your right to that opinion even if I disagree.

And i respect yours, maybe we should start a new thread on T-72 and see if we can brawl some..

GarryB

GarryB: Posts : 40538
Points : 41038
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand

Post n°58

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

GarryB Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:38 am

Agree, modern tanks. Although it wont be a disadvantage to be able to fire quickly rather than slowly.

All other things being equal a high rate of fire is not a bad thing.

It is just not the most critical feature.

Yes, and they also uparmored, changed engine and radios, so it was a good tank, not great, but good.

The engine change and radio change is perfectly normal... using your own engines and radios makes them more compatible with your logistics train.

And vs Georgia it was attached to motor rifle brigades, also in the role of infantry support. I dont think they wanted to go tank battling with T-72s.

They had plenty of newer tanks available if they feared Georgian T-72s capabilities with their Israeli upgrades.

Totally agree, it would be much more interesting to see a Russian version of top 10 tanks..

Would actually rather see the top x tanks from country y for a range of countries... Britain, France, Germany, Russia, US, etc etc.

Cyberspec

Cyberspec: Posts : 2904
Points : 3057
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Terra Australis

Post n°59

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Cyberspec Thu Jul 11, 2019 1:03 am

Behold...the T-62 wil be upgraded and continue to soldier on with "Territorial Defence" units

Russian battle tanks T-62 and T-62M will get spare barrels of tank guns 2A20 within the framework of development work "Osnova-U". This became known from the annual report of the Corporation "Uralvagonzavod".

The objectives of this update of the pretty outdated machines explained the chief editor of the magazine "Arsenal Fatherland" Victor murakhovski. According to him, tanks T-62 and various modifications are well proven in the 2008 conflict. He noted that it is reliable and proven over many years of operation technique that is currently used in Syria.

Military expert added that these tanks are not suitable to conduct deep offensive operations in the current situation, but do well with the units of the territorial defence, where they were included. Murakhovski noticed that this T-62 have all the necessary combat options, so the gun barrels will be replaced and the ammo. He said that at the moment develops new armor-piercing and high-explosive shells.

Also the chief editor of the magazine "Arsenal Fatherland" stated that the modification of the T-62M could be armed and controlled anti-tank missile. Thus, in his opinion, the use of the troops of these tanks along with the T-90M and T-14 "Armata" is justified, because it would be unreasonable to apply the most modern machines for performing tasks of territorial defense.

https://slovodel.com/531790-tanki-t-62-i-t-62m-poluchat-novye-orudiya-i-boekomplekt

Eugenio Argentina likes this post

GarryB

GarryB: Posts : 40538
Points : 41038
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand

Post n°60

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

GarryB Thu Jul 11, 2019 7:00 am

Seems strange to keep a whole extra tank gun calibre in service when they clearly have plenty of T-72 vehicles around the place... I suppose the T-62s are cheap but I would think that would make them better options to send to war zones to help allies...

BTW rereading this thread regarding rate of fire... the Soviets actually considered building T-34s with their 76.2mm guns replaced with the at the time new 57mm anti tank guns because its armour penetration was much better out to extended ranges.

The problem was that although it could carry more ammo and had a higher rate of fire, the rounds were only effective at penetrating armour and not so good against infantry or enemy positions.

The HE power of the larger calibre meant it was preferred over the smaller calibre better penetrating calibre... which was repeated again later in the war when choosing a new gun for the new heavy tanks to replace the KV series... they chose a 122mm gun over a better penetrating 100mm gun because the HE round of the 122mm round was more effective and production was easier as they already had 122mm calibre guns in mass production.

Cyberspec

Cyberspec: Posts : 2904
Points : 3057
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Terra Australis

Post n°61

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Cyberspec Thu Jul 11, 2019 8:21 am

I think they're bringing them back mainly to boost numbers. Same deal with the BMP-1 upgrade shown at the recent exhibition....War is coming Cool

magnumcromagnon

magnumcromagnon: Posts : 8138
Points : 8273
Join date : 2013-12-05
Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

Post n°62

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

magnumcromagnon Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:57 am

They should be converted in to UGV drone tanks.

miketheterrible

miketheterrible: Posts : 7383
Points : 7341
Join date : 2016-11-06

Post n°63

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

miketheterrible Thu Jul 11, 2019 10:15 am

Or do something similar to the T-55M6 upgrade.

We may see eventually what they will do.

GarryB

GarryB: Posts : 40538
Points : 41038
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand

Post n°64

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

GarryB Thu Jul 11, 2019 1:26 pm

Well they would be better than nothing and as a remote controlled vehicle they would be interesting... but it would be vastly easier to automate a T-72 or newer vehicle with its automatic gun loader...

The main issue for me is the ammo... it is different from all their other operational tanks... it is another calibre they need to keep in stocks and stores for when they want to use it.

If they put a T-72 turret on it they get a better gun with an auto loader which would make turning it into a robot tank much easier and it shares standard ammo with all other Russian tanks.

Ahh well, I suppose they can upgrade them and use them and then gift them to Syria or Afghanistan when they get a few kms on them.

Walther von Oldenburg

Walther von Oldenburg: Posts : 1725
Points : 1844
Join date : 2015-01-23
Age : 33
Location : Oldenburg

Post n°65

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Walther von Oldenburg Thu Jul 11, 2019 1:32 pm

There aren't even any new rounds for 115mm gun. The newest one is 3BM36 from late 1980s with 500mm penetration.

Isos

Isos: Posts : 11601
Points : 11569
Join date : 2015-11-06

Post n°66

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Isos Thu Jul 11, 2019 1:49 pm

Walther von Oldenburg wrote:There aren't even any new rounds for 115mm gun. The newest one is 3BM36 from late 1980s with 500mm penetration.

Nato forces are mostly composed of vehicles with far less than 500mm protection so it is enough.

Atgm teams will take care of any heavier tank.

A WW2 era type round that penetrate and explodes inside vehicles would be more usefull as it would one shot any IFV and APC.

APFSDS will only go through the vehicle.

magnumcromagnon

magnumcromagnon: Posts : 8138
Points : 8273
Join date : 2013-12-05
Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

Post n°67

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

magnumcromagnon Thu Jul 11, 2019 2:57 pm

Isos wrote:

Walther von Oldenburg wrote:There aren't even any new rounds for 115mm gun. The newest one is 3BM36 from late 1980s with 500mm penetration.

Nato forces are mostly composed of vehicles with far less than 500mm protection so it is enough.

Atgm teams will take care of any heavier tank.

A WW2 era type round that penetrate and explodes inside vehicles would be more usefull as it would one shot any IFV and APC.

APFSDS will only go through the vehicle.

The main gun should be replaced with 16 Kornet-M missiles, as well as a 57mm grenade launcher with a coaxial 12.7mm Kord machine gun on a RWS.

Hole

Hole: Posts : 11120
Points : 11098
Join date : 2018-03-24
Age : 48
Location : Scholzistan

Post n°68

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Hole Thu Jul 11, 2019 4:47 pm

They are for the territorial army = reserve units. Syria showed that the T-62 is still very useful in infantry support.

0nillie0

0nillie0: Posts : 239
Points : 241
Join date : 2016-05-15
Age : 38
Location : Flanders, Belgium

Post n°69

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

0nillie0 Thu Jul 11, 2019 6:54 pm

Hole wrote:They are for the territorial army = reserve units. Syria showed that the T-62 is still very useful in infantry support.

Its a polite way of saying that these T-62's should only be facing unarmed or lightly armed civilians in a situation of domestic civil unrest, or alternatively insurgents/terrorists with limited access to heavy weapons (think Dagestan etc...).

Against such threats, the tank has indeed proven itself useful in Syria.

Hole

Hole: Posts : 11120
Points : 11098
Join date : 2018-03-24
Age : 48
Location : Scholzistan

Post n°70

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Hole Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:14 pm

Tanks were never used against lightly armed civilians in Syria, but against well armed terrorists supported by NATO countries. Most of these units were better armed then western armies.

Cyberspec

Cyberspec: Posts : 2904
Points : 3057
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Terra Australis

Post n°71

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Cyberspec Thu Jul 11, 2019 10:09 pm

Hole wrote:They are for the territorial army = reserve units. Syria showed that the T-62 is still very useful in infantry support.

That's what the report says, to be used by "Territorial Defence" units aka 3rd eschelon units (reservists aged 40 + yrs). So I don't expect any significant changes apart from the new ammo mentioned in the article

0nillie0

0nillie0: Posts : 239
Points : 241
Join date : 2016-05-15
Age : 38
Location : Flanders, Belgium

Post n°72

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

0nillie0 Thu Jul 11, 2019 10:20 pm

Hole wrote:Tanks were never used against lightly armed civilians in Syria, but against well armed terrorists supported by NATO countries. Most of these units were better armed then western armies.

Tanks where used for pretty much everything...especially in the early stages of the conflict. But that is not the point i was trying to make.

T-62's that where deployed in Syria have been and continue to be used at the front lines, and face a variety of heavy weapons and modern tank threats. I agree wholeheartedly with you on that.
My point is that because it performed above expectations in such high intensity conflict, the reasoning is that it should be more than adequate for a potential low intensity conflict within own borders...let alone for exercises during peace time.

Reservists are not exactly "the tip of the spear". If a superpower invades, or a high intensity conflict erupts, more capable troops with better equipment will be deployed. T-62's should be nowhere near the Russian front lines.
But if civil unrest should erupt in some village or town, and low intensity fighting occurs, then the sight of some T-62's rolling up the main street should be more than adequate to restore some order.

Furthermore i would take everything in the article with a grain of salt. Especially development of new rounds.
The fact that he is quoting "performance of the tank in the 2008 conflict" is also kind of weird to me.

TLDR : T-62(M) is good enough for duty with reservists, despite old age. Obviously the gun still needs to shoot and the ammo still needs to work, so it makes sense that both need to be up to standard. Other than that, i would not read too much into the article.

GarryB

GarryB: Posts : 40538
Points : 41038
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand

Post n°73

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

GarryB Fri Jul 12, 2019 10:15 am

There aren't even any new rounds for 115mm gun. The newest one is 3BM36 from late 1980s with 500mm penetration.

Murakhovski noticed that this T-62 have all the necessary combat options, so the gun barrels will be replaced and the ammo. He said that at the moment develops new armor-piercing and high-explosive shells.

Suggests new ammo is being developed...

Nato forces are mostly composed of vehicles with far less than 500mm protection so it is enough.

Atgm teams will take care of any heavier tank.

Plus in any armoured force only 5% are tanks... and for the rest a 500mm penetration performance is fine... things like command vehicles or IFVs need to be taken out too and there will be a lot more of them than tanks.

A WW2 era type round that penetrate and explodes inside vehicles would be more usefull as it would one shot any IFV and APC.

I quite agree... an APHE round would be devastating against light and medium armoured vehicles...

The main gun should be replaced with 16 Kornet-M missiles, as well as a 57mm grenade launcher with a coaxial 12.7mm Kord machine gun on a RWS.

I think the point of the operation is that the 115mm gun would be cheaper and more versatile.

I think a 125mm gun upgrade to unify guns and ammo makes more sense for Russia though a few allies might appreciate new 115mm gun ammo.

Being one piece ammo it would be interesting if they adapted the T-72 turret and autoloader to handle a 115mm gun and ammo...

That's what the report says, to be used by "Territorial Defence" units aka 3rd eschelon units (reservists aged 40 + yrs). So I don't expect any significant changes apart from the new ammo mentioned in the article

I still think they could be better unified with standardised ammo and gun calibres... of course perhaps they have a lot of gun barrels in stock and quite a bit of ammo left over in storage and this is a way of using it all up over the next few years... perhaps with these vehicles ending up as robots for more sophisticated forces...

My point is that because it performed above expectations in such high intensity conflict, the reasoning is that it should be more than adequate for a potential low intensity conflict within own borders...let alone for exercises during peace time.

They were effective enough when properly used in Georgia 2008 as well.

The fact that he is quoting "performance of the tank in the 2008 conflict" is also kind of weird to me.

The forces that responded to Georgian aggression in south ossetia included forces with T-62s.

Cyberspec

Cyberspec: Posts : 2904
Points : 3057
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Terra Australis

Post n°74

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Cyberspec Fri Jul 12, 2019 11:02 am

The T-62 also served with some Interior Forces during various operations in the Caucasus in the 90's and early 2000's...it was said the T-62's were preferred in mountanious terrain (lighter weight?). They also made up the bulk of the tanks in Afghanistan in the 80's

0nillie0

0nillie0: Posts : 239
Points : 241
Join date : 2016-05-15
Age : 38
Location : Flanders, Belgium

Post n°75

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

0nillie0 Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:02 pm

GarryB wrote:

They were effective enough when properly used in Georgia 2008 as well.

The forces that responded to Georgian aggression in south ossetia included forces with T-62s.

I am aware of that Garry. Im just saying that IMHO it would make more sense to talk about the performance of T-62M in Syria as an argument in favor of the tank. The conflict is topical and ongoing, rather than a decade old. Furhtermore conditions in Syria for the most part have been arguably more intense than they where in Georgia. There where some confrontations with Georgian tanks, and Russian crews also faced Georgian anti-tank weapons. But the T-62's in Syria have been under constant threat of ATGM fire and IED's for years now, and as already pointed out, the enemy forces in Syria are just as equipped and probably better trained than the Georgians where in 08.

One thing i had not yet considered is that the tanks in Syria are not operated by Russians, which could be the reason why he does not talk about it, but rather limits himself to quoting peformance in Georgia. It would make sense that way.

Russia Defence Forum

T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Re: T-62s in Russian Army

Similar topics

Similar topics