Russia Tank Force: Present and Future (Numbers)

T-80 was "rejected" because of high fuel consumption. Army has not changed its opinion since then. The vulnerability issue is wildly overplayed and not that much of a factor.

There are so many T-72s left, that rationalizing the force to one (well, almost one) type makes sense. T-64s are ancient and pointless, there are enough T-72s for training. They have bee dumped several years back from training, for good reason.
While I would like to see T-80 live out its life, especially with proliferation of T-72B3 keeping them around is hard to justify. They are even more pointless to keep in reserve IMO. T-72 is a much more suitable reserve or mobilization tank, especially given the kind of crews reserve units would get in wartime.
With mostly T-72s, training, large scale technical support in theater, and spare cannibalization becomes easier. Presumably they do have enough spares built up that continuing T-80 operations for years, but I guess they really want to narrow it down to one type.

T-62 and T-55 are gone.

akd wrote:I just did.  He stopped updating that site a long time ago.

Please feel free to provide an original source for the report if you don't think Fofanov's doubts raise concerns about its veracity.  Everything I can find on this report points back to Fofanov's website, except some vague references to the original source being a post in a Russian language forum.

Fofanov and others have discussed the trials on Russian forums. The consensus is it is not reliable data, and sadly should be dismissed.

Mike E wrote:
Figured that, and it seems like a good option both economically and militarily... Why are the T-80's going to get chopped when the T-72 is technically older?

That depends on what T-72 and what T-80 you're talking about. The T-80B series is not newer than the T-72B series by any significant degree. T-72Bs were built right up to the end of the USSR (and beyond I believe). The Russian force is clearly being rationalised to T-72B tanks - distinct from say T-72A tanks which you never see nowadays, and which are probably being exported to fight in Syria or something.

EDIT: only a comparative handful of T-80Us exist. T-80UDs built in Ukraine have been withdrawn.

Vympel wrote:

Mike E wrote:
Figured that, and it seems like a good option both economically and militarily... Why are the T-80's going to get chopped when the T-72 is technically older?

That depends on what T-72 and what T-80 you're talking about. The T-80B series is not newer than the T-72B series by any significant degree. T-72Bs were built right up to the end of the USSR (and beyond I believe). The Russian force is clearly being rationalised to T-72B tanks - distinct from say T-72A tanks which you never see nowadays, and which are probably being exported to fight in Syria or something.

EDIT: only a comparative handful of T-80Us exist. T-80UDs built in Ukraine have been withdrawn.

No matter how you look at it, they are both of the same generation of MBT's. - If they retire some of the T-80's (in this case all of them) why not retire some T-72's along with it? I'm confused on why they'd retire the T-80 and not both when they are of the same age... The only explanation I can think of is that the T-72 is has more modified variants, but that's it...  The gas-guzzling problem could be fixed with a new, and/or upgraded engine and transmission etc.

Mike E wrote:
No matter how you look at it, they are both of the same generation of MBT's. - If they retire some of the T-80's (in this case all of them) why not retire some T-72's along with it? I'm confused on why they'd retire the T-80 and not both when they are of the same age... The only explanation I can think of is that the T-72 is has more modified variants, but that's it...  The gas-guzzling problem could be fixed with a new, and/or upgraded engine and transmission etc.

What part is confusing? The logic is rationalization of the tank fleet, that is basically it.
Russia has more tanks that it needs, especially with increased emphasis on ready formations vs vast war stocks.
Taking out parts of both tank fleets is pointless. You might as well get rid of one entirely and not complicate future operations. Simplifying your technical diversity is always a good thing.  

There is no question of age- the T-80 is a fine tank (in fact you could easily argue it is better than T-72B without any upgrades). However the gas issue is there. Changing engine and transmission, well, you do not have a T-80 anymore, since it is very much designed to use a compact gas turbine. What other option is there, to buy 6TD from Ukraine ? It is costly, there is no project to do so, and at the end of the day you might as well Kapremont a T-72 from storage (or even upgrade it, would probably cost no less then switching the T-80s turbine out) and slim your tank force down to one less vehicle.

TR1 wrote:

Mike E wrote:
No matter how you look at it, they are both of the same generation of MBT's. - If they retire some of the T-80's (in this case all of them) why not retire some T-72's along with it? I'm confused on why they'd retire the T-80 and not both when they are of the same age... The only explanation I can think of is that the T-72 is has more modified variants, but that's it...  The gas-guzzling problem could be fixed with a new, and/or upgraded engine and transmission etc.

What part is confusing? The logic is rationalization of the tank fleet, that is basically it.
Russia has more tanks that it needs, especially with increased emphasis on ready formations vs vast war stocks.
Taking out parts of both tank fleets is pointless. You might as well get rid of one entirely and not complicate future operations. Simplifying your technical diversity is always a good thing.  

There is no question of age- the T-80 is a fine tank (in fact you could easily argue it is better than T-72B without any upgrades). However the gas issue is there. Changing engine and transmission, well, you do not have a T-80 anymore, since it is very much designed to use a compact gas turbine. What other option is there, to buy 6TD from Ukraine ? It is costly, there is no project to do so, and at the end of the day you might as well Kapremont a T-72 from storage (or even upgrade it, would probably cost no less then switching the T-80s turbine out) and slim your tank force down to one less vehicle.

I guess, it just seems counter intuitive to myself....
"Too many? is true, but there can never be "too many in good shape" (or order).
Simplifying is great, but simply throwing away tanks that run fine isn't... Like I said earlier, I'm sure that there are countries that would love to get their hands on a T-80 at bargain-bin prices. - They could give em' to Syria for all I care!

Nobody wants to buy T-80. Well, ok. Maybe one or two countries do. Yemen has been the only one to buy used T-80s. A few nations bought T-80U.

But the point is it has been barely pushed for export and with good reason. The gas turbine consumption. It is pricier to operate. T-72 has been the big export commodity for both Russia and Ukraine, as far as used tanks go.
And we are not talking about them just taking fully functional tanks and cutting them up. They operate them until they run out of service life, then the plan is to get rid of them (though they seem to be soldiering on for now).

So anyone looking to get the tank would have to pay to get it Kapremonted, and then deal with a vehicle fundamentally more expensive to run than T-72. Pointless to do, if they can just...get a T-72.

I have a question. Russian tank troops wear the standard Russian ground forces green beret or black beret??

George1 wrote:I have a question. Russian tank troops wear the standard Russian ground forces green beret or black beret??

Black barret.

Here russian tank crew from the Tank biathlon recieving golden tank trophey.

Can anyone give us info about how many battle tanks are in service now with Russian ground forces?

T-90:
T-80:
T-72B2/B3:
T-72:

Are they going to keep modernizing T-72s even after the Armata production starts? If my numbers are correct, now they have 700+ T90s, 700 modernized T-72s (previous post) and they are going to produce over 2000 Armatas/T-14/whatever by 2020. That would be close to 4000, and they probably continue building Armatas after 2020, right? In any case, impressive numbers.

1.) There are less than 500 T-90s- and far from all of them are T-90As. Some are early T-90s from the 1990s.
2.) There won't be anywhere near 2000 T-14s by 2020, let's be realistic. That might be the eventual goal but it is more long term.
3.) They are going to continue with the T-72B3(?) modernization, but supposedly this upcoming year it will be the "Biathlon" model with the panoramic sight, new engine, transmission etc. I am mixed on this- the upgrade is fairly thorough but one wonders how expensive it is. Also they are paying for tanks that have essentially no improvement on protection from T-72s made in 1989...25 years ago.
4.) Mind you they are withdrawing the T-80 from the inventory, so the "new" T-72s are not indicative of any increase in tank strength.

By the time the Armata MBT numbers are filled out the oldest T-90s and T-72s will be ripe for withdrawal.
Potentially there will be a large stock of used, cheap T-72s with a decent fire control system....especially if they can put a decent protection package on it, might be a good export item.

TR1 wrote:1.) There are less than 500 T-90s- and far from all of them are T-90As. Some are early T-90s from the 1990s.
2.) There won't be anywhere near 2000 T-14s by 2020, let's be realistic. That might be the eventual goal but it is more long term.
3.) They are going to continue with the T-72B3(?) modernization, but supposedly this upcoming year it will be the "Biathlon" model with the panoramic sight, new engine, transmission etc. I am mixed on this- the upgrade is fairly thorough but one wonders how expensive it is. Also they are paying for tanks that have essentially no improvement on protection from T-72s made in 1989...25 years ago.
4.) Mind you they are withdrawing the T-80 from the inventory, so the "new" T-72s are not indicative of any increase in tank strength.

By the time the Armata MBT numbers are filled out the oldest T-90s and T-72s will be ripe for withdrawal.
Potentially there will be a large stock of used, cheap T-72s with a decent fire control system....especially if they can put a decent protection package on it, might be a good export item.

I think T-90s production should have been continued, at least until next year that production of armata will start

Well, according to Wiki they have 900 T-90As as of 2014 (last time I checked it was around 700). I guess wiki sucks lol, but atleast 2 sources are included with that number.

2300 sure is an impressive number, but according to an interview that was posted here like a month ago (?) that's what they are seriously planning, by 2020. And the re-armament program is on schedule atm, so... Not that I know anything about their tank production capability. Still, it would make perfect sense to have over 2000 new tanks when they are planning to re-equip 70% of the army as a whole.

And yeah, T-80 is gone but they still had like 20k tanks left a few years ago... So if they can build 2300 T-14s and then have 2000+ additional T-90s + modernized T-72s, it will be an adequate tank fleet, even when you compare it to the likes of US and China, IMO. Both have something like 6000 MBTs each, IIRC.

Kimppis wrote:

2300 sure is an impressive number, but according to an interview that was posted here like a month ago (?) that's what they are seriously planning, by 2020. And the re-armament program is on schedule atm, so... Not that I know anything about their tank production capability. Still, it would make perfect sense to have over 2000 new thanks when they are planning to re-equip 70% of the army as a whole.

Don't hold your breath. Armata is an ambitious project whose closest realistic analogue, the GCV program in the US, was canned earlier this year. Armata's more mature than the GCV, but these kind of modular fighting machines have complex development processes especially when implemented on such a large scale. There's going to be speedbumps along its path to procurement.

If they manage to crank out half that number by 2020, I'll be ecstatic.

and they are going to produce over 2000 Armatas/T-14/whatever by 2020.

Keep in mind that the armata is not just a heavy tank, it is also an APC and command vehicle etc etc...

In a brigade structure of the hundreds of vehicles only about 30 vehicles will be MBTs and the rest will have other purposes. this means that of 2000 armatas made by 2020 perhaps 200-300 might be MBT versions.

That would be close to 4000, and they probably continue building Armatas after 2020, right? In any case, impressive numbers.

They will certainly need to continue production after 2020.

Plans are for 70% new equipment by 2020, though the current financial situation might stretch that, the goals wont be shifted too much.

They are going to continue with the T-72B3(?) modernization, but supposedly this upcoming year it will be the "Biathlon" model with the panoramic sight, new engine, transmission etc. I am mixed on this- the upgrade is fairly thorough but one wonders how expensive it is. Also they are paying for tanks that have essentially no improvement on protection from T-72s made in 1989...25 years ago.

The important thing is that new crews get new comms and battle management systems and night optics so even if it doesn't have the same level of protection as the armata it can at least train in many of the same tactics and situations as a new tank.

these upgrades might include new parts that are not cheap now, but production and use will allow commanders to get experience with things like pano sights and more reliable transmissions.

the new comms should allow better communication and coordination and the use of things like UAVs etc.

Armata's more mature than the GCV, but these kind of modular fighting machines have complex development processes especially when implemented on such a large scale. There's going to be speedbumps along its path to procurement.

The way they have developed these new vehicles and vehicle families suggests a real step forward in modular systems with different weight class vehicles using the ground equivalent of avionics... avionics are aviation electronics... sensors, computer networks and systems all integrated and linked together. the Ratnik program took all the aspects of a soldiers equipment and instead of each component being developed independently and separately it put them all together... these new vehicle families will be the same with optimised equipment and systems developed for MBTs and IFVs and command vehicles and then adapted to each weight class.

UVZ has enormous production potential and could certainly build 2000 armata vehicles by 2020... that would only be about 500 a year with production starting in 2016.

GarryB wrote:Keep in mind that the armata is not just a heavy tank, it is also an APC and command vehicle etc etc...

In a brigade structure of the hundreds of vehicles only about 30 vehicles will be MBTs and the rest will have other purposes. this means that of 2000 armatas made by 2020 perhaps 200-300 might be MBT versions.

I based that number on this post in the Armata thread:

George1 wrote:

translation of some key points of this interview :

Nothing specific was said. Since its still classified for the most part, he didn't reveal any details. He confirmed what is already known:

- will definitely be shown on May 9th Victory Day parade. There is also a chance it will be shown in September at an arms expo.
- very high crew survivability
- tons of automation
- brand new design as a whole: suspension, armor, various systems
- advanced targeting systems

Armata is expected to be given to the army in 2017. Per presidents orders the Armata MBT's production will roughly number in 2300 units, with productions running into year 2020. This is just the MBT numbers, not counting all the other new armor fighting vehicles and etc.
The rest of the interview is about the armor industry as a whole around the world. Indian partnership is going very smooth, lots of technology being licensed both ways, his corporation is helping India on their own Arjun tank upgrades and production. He talks about the homegrown operations - his corporation has come a long way, able to combine their efforts with other companies at home. They are now able to produce 10x more units than before, lots of money being put towards more R&D and future investments into the operation.

Mentions Ukraine, the interviewer asks what the Ukrainian tank factories state will be after this whole ordeal. His company is not affected, or the whole homegrown operation. Majority of the parts were being supplied from Russia to Ukraine to build some of the components. All production issues will be mitigated and produced at home.

In general the company is very active around the world, took on more orders at home and abroad than ever before and will continue to increase capacity and production numbers.

i hope they dont go loco on the first years while making the 2300 armata mbts- do it like how muricans did stuff, in blocks. 1000 block 1s until 2025 will be a very nice number, this will have conventional gun, 3 man crew and other earlier iterations of stuff that dont make it out in time. In ten years time a lot of the next gen stuff would be ready and thoroughly tested like ETC gun, 2 man crew and top attack missiles and the like then you introduce the block 2.

I based that number on this post in the Armata thread:

Interesting...

The fact that they will have unified electronic/sensor/weapon packages or modules for each family suggests that they will likely introduce the vehicles in brigades rather than MBTs and then IFVs etc etc.

It would certainly make sense to produce these vehicles quickly, but the interesting thing would be the ratio of vehicles. The CFE agreement limits the number of MBTs that Russia can operate in European Russia and from memory that was something like 6,000 vehicles of which more than half are required to be in storage at any given time.

The issue will be what equates to a MBT... does a Typhoon gun platform with a 125mm main gun count as a MBT when it weighs 18 tons on a 6 wheel vehicle base? What if it only has a high velocity 57mm gun and uses Kornet-M missiles for long range tank engagements?

The next few years will be interesting..

[quote="George1"]Can anyone give us info about how many battle tanks are in service now with Russian ground forces?

T-90:~500
T-80:~100
T-72B2/B3:~750
T-72B/BA:~1,200

The only unit that for sure still uses the T-80BV is the 18th MGA division, totals would include Coastal units under Navy control. Only a couple hundred T-80 were modernized, so rest would be in reserve. As far as I'm aware there were around 7-8,000 total T-72B's produced, so would expect that to be the cut off point for reserves.

franco wrote:

George1 wrote:Can anyone give us info about how many battle tanks are in service now with Russian ground forces?

T-90:~500
T-80:~100
T-72B2/B3:~750
T-72B/BA:~1,200

The only unit that for sure still uses the T-80BV is the 18th MGA division, totals would include Coastal units under Navy control. Only a couple hundred T-80 were modernized, so rest would be in reserve. As far as I'm aware there were around 7-8,000 total T-72B's produced, so would expect that to be the cut off point for reserves.

thanks for the numbers. What is MGA? Guards Tank Division??

"thanks for the numbers. What is MGA? Guards Tank Division??"

Machine Gun Artillery - Coastal Defense unit guarding the Kuriles.

Further to my figures, the T-80's figure could be 100 -200 higher depending on how many brigades have still not switched over. There are 3-4 MR/TK brigades that I have not seen confirmed. Of course this would result in a corresponding lower T-72B total. Another factor to consider is that Russian tank battalions generally keep an extra 10 older models around for training and spares. That would add another 500 to the total.

Are the tank numbers really that low? That's disappointing.  Does anyone know the armor values the tanks in service have?

Don't know where those numbers come from. Last ones I heard, there are over 1000 T-90 variants in service.

flamming_python wrote:Don't know where those numbers come from. Last ones I heard, there are over 1000 T-90 variants in service.

There are a lot of different numbers out there and don't believe we will ever know the exact totals. The numbers that IMO have the most support is that the Russian army has received ~700 T-90 variants almost equally between the 90 and the 90A. The first 200 of the 90's were so badly misused by the conscript crews that they were put in storage as N/S and 15 years later still sit there. That leaves 500 of which about 25% would be 90's and the rest 90A's. Your total of 1,000 in service would equal 20 battalions but I'm only aware of 8-9 battalions using the T-90.