Tank Warfare: Russian Armour vs Western Armour

dino00 wrote:
Abrams" against Russian tanks: information wars and combat reality.

https://zvezdaweekly.ru/news/t/20187241125-9EcHF.html

That is a really long article in Russian. Any chance of a Russian speaker around here doing a little summary?

What is Russia’s T-90M Tank and How Does It Stack Up Against NATO’s Top Armor?, by Ilya Tsukanov for SputnikNews. 01.28.2023.

NATO’s proxy war against Russia in Ukraine saw another escalation this week, with the Western alliance promising to send over 150 of the Western alliance’s current-gen tanks – the Leopard 2 and the Abrams. How does Russia’s most advanced third-gen tank, the T-90M Proryv, compare against these heavy weapons? Sputnik investigates.

Although German and US officials have clarified that it will take “months” for their promised armor to arrive in Ukraine, Western media and defense analysts are already salivating at the prospect of these tanks meeting their Russian counterparts on the battlefield for the first time.

"Abrams and Challenger tanks ‘made to beat Russia’: Why muddy Ukraine is ideal warzone,” one outlet gushes. “Abrams, Leopard and Challenger 2 vs. T-72: How Western Tanks Compare to Russia’s Armor,” another title reads, apparently taking their audience for children and comparing the early 1970s-era Soviet-era second generation tank to third-gen NATO armor introduced between a decade and two-and-a-half decades later.

Only a handful of media have actually focused on the capabilities of the T-90 – Russia’s most modern tank, at any length, with some dismissing it as “essentially a late-model T-72 hull and turret” with an upgraded engine. One outlet begrudgingly admits that “some versions of the T-90…are even better than their NATO opposites, with a superior gun and anti-tank missile system,” but assures that superior Ukrainian training will prevail.

Is that really the case?

What is the T-90 Main Battle Tank?

The T-90 is the first series of MBTs (or simply ‘main tanks’ under Russian military nomenclature) to be manufactured almost entirely in the post-Soviet period. The tank was designed in the mid-to-late 1980s, and constituted a deep overhaul of the T-72B, a Soviet tank fielded in vast numbers, featuring improved dynamic protection, a Shtora-series active protection system designed to disrupt the laser designator and rangefinder systems of anti-tank missile systems, a welded turret (in later models), superior sloped alloy and composite armor, better fire control system, communications and navigations equipment, and new engine. Originally called the T-72BU, the tank reportedly received the T-90 name due to Russian President Boris Yeltsin’s desire to proclaim the creation of the “first Russian tank” built after the Soviet period.

Weighing between 46 and 48 tons, the T-90 is 9.6 meters long, 3.78 meters wide and stands 2.22 meters off the ground. Like its predecessors, it is significantly lighter and smaller than NATO tanks of the 1980s and 1990s (which weigh between 62 and 74 tons, and are up to three meters tall, in the Leopard 2’s case).

The T-90 features a 2A46 125 mm/L48 smoothbore cannon (used on a broad range of Russian, Ukrainian, and Chinese tanks), and either a 12.7 mm or 7.62 mm machine gun as secondary armament. The gun and its variations compare favorably to the Rh-120 L/44 120 mm smoothbore fitted aboard the Leopard 2, and can fire rounds up to 4,000 meters – 500 m further than the German gun.

The T-90’s smaller size and low profile compared to Western tanks, whose design philosophy dates back all the way to the post-WWII era, has a number of reasons, including:

- Improved mobility, including through tight spaces such as woods and mountainous areas.
- Perceived superior ability to entrench itself.
- Smaller, simpler overall design, which means more tanks can be built for fewer resources.
- More compact profile means longer operational range (up to 550 km without optional rear fuel drums – compared to the Abrams' 425 km), and better bridge and river crossing capabilities.
- Interchangeability of some components should mean superior logistics and repair capabilities (a major headache for NATO today is juggling the multitude of distinct and incompatible weapons sent to Ukraine, with these problems expected to multiply when Western tanks arrive).

What is the T-90M?

The T-90M Proryv (literally "Breakthrough") is the latest version of the T-90 series. The tank is a thorough upgrade of the base T-90, and includes a new turret module with multi-layer armor, improved crew protection thanks to the placement of its ammunition rack outside the crew compartment, and an improved main gun – 125 mm 2A82 – the same gun fitted on prospective next-gen tanks such as the T-14 Armata.

The T-90M features an automated Kalina fire control system, a remotely controlled 12.7mm Kord machine gun, a Relict dynamic defense system, and fifth-gen digital communication system. Firsts in Russian tank design include air conditioning and steering and transmission with improved ease of use for the tank driver. T-90Ms also feature the Arena-M, an advanced active protection system for anti-tank and anti-missile defense.

Deliveries of the tank to the Russian military began in 2020.

How Many T-90s Does Russia Have?

As many as 1,000 T-90s of various modifications have been produced between 1992 and today. Russia had about 350 T-90As and up to 100 T-90Ms in service in 2022, with 200 more T-90s in storage. The military announced plans in 2018 to upgrade all of its T-90s to T-90Ms by 2025.

How Many T-90s Do Other Countries Have?

India, not Russia, is actually the biggest operator of T-90 series tanks – with its inventory consisting of a whopping 1,100 T-90S "Bhishma" MBTs, many produced under license by Indian manufacturers. Other users include Algeria, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Syria, Turkmenistan, Uganda, and Vietnam.

How Has the T-90 Fared in Combat?

In its 30+ year lifespan, the T-90’s variants have racked up operational experience in wide range of conditions, starting, on an experimental basis, in Chechnya in 1995, where a small number of T-90s proved “practically invulnerable” to anti-tank weapons thanks to its onboard active protection system.

Between 30 and 40 T-90s of various modifications were deployed to Syria in 2015, and used by Syrian tankers in fierce battles against Western, Gulf, and Turkish-backed Islamist militants. The tanks’ ATGM protection proved its effectiveness repeatedly against the TOW anti-tank missiles flooded into the country by the CIA. Between three and six T-90s were damaged beyond repair or destroyed in the war, with one tank falling to the terrorists. Others suffered damage but were repaired to fight another day. T-90s in Syria compared favorably to the Leopard 2, which suffered up to a dozen losses during Turkey’s operations in the country’s north from 2016 onward.

T-90S model tanks were also used by Azerbaijani forces during the 2020 Karabakh War, with between one and four lost to Armenian militias in the disputed territory.
Russian forces have used T-90s extensively in the conflict in Ukraine. The information warfare that has accompanied the conflict has blanketed the battlefield with a thick fog of war in which real losses are difficult to estimate, with Western observers claiming that two dozen or even more have been lost and a few even captured by Ukraine.

However, as a Ukrainian officer recently admitted, Ukraine’s tanks, mostly consisting of old stocks of Soviet-era T-62 and T-72s, are no match for the T-90s. “This is where the quality of what we have is important. If you come across a T-90, you need three of ours to deal with it – or very good luck,” the commander candidly told British media last week.

How Does the T-90 Match Up Against Western MBTs Promised Kiev?

Triumphant articles and statements have been made on both sides about how one or the other’s tanks will make short work of their opponents. However, as previously noted, the outcome of any real-world tank-on-tank encounter will depend on tank crew skill, the competency of commanders, the availability of tactical and strategic battlefield intelligence, artillery, air, and ATGM-wielding infantry support, and the efficiency of rear-area refueling, refit, and repair.

Tanks’ main purpose, in optimal conditions, is to perform rapid, large-scale armored breakthroughs across a wide front. As recently pointed out to Sputnik by Russian military expert Alexei Leonkov, the number of NATO tanks being sent to Ukraine to take on Russian armor, including the T-90, “is absolutely not enough to carry out any kind of tactical or operational-practical operation,” with many “more tanks…required for that.”

Furthermore, as Sputnik contributor Scott Ritter has explained, effective tank operations require them to be used as part of a combined arms team with infantry support and “copious amounts of supporting arms.” Without this backup, any tank “is simply an expensive mobile coffin,” according to Ritter.

https://sputniknews.com/20230128/what-is-the-russian-t-90m-tank-and-how-does-it-stack-up-against-natos-top-armor-1106788224.html

Something interesting.

https://t.me/SIL0VIKI/60895

A frontline backstage. A repair unit.
Just pay attention to the fact, that they are safe enough to do that in an open field, in the provisional shelter - yet it is an industrial-grade modular shelter.
Those are armored vehicles that are often being reported as destroyed ... It will be back in ranks in a day, with all the subsystems serviced or replaced ...

Ukrs are trying to do that in civilian-grade car service stations. Russkie carried a targeted campaign hitting them back in Summer, reducing the overall repair capability to almost nonexisting status.

And some more Terminators :

https://t.me/SIL0VIKI/60897

The tactic I watched is confirmed - they are shooting the trees to rain the AT teams with fragments.

This stuff (repair units, modular shelters and so on) are the real game-changers.
This stuff wins wars, not some supi-dupi weapon which can´t be serviced accordingly or even supplied with ammo/fuel in sufficient numbers.

Shit.
You have made me realise that I put that in the wrong thread
Sorry folks!
Can it stay or should I delete that?

I put that in Ukrainian thread already, but fits here either.

Some reports that "burning T-90M" from a week ago or so, was de facto Nakidka cover on fire after the ATGM strike. Tank was fine.

It is a very important aspect in comparing the two tanks... a US M1A2 is vastly better than a Ukrainian one... just as a Russian T-90 is going to be more potent than a Syrian or Iraqi one simply because of the air and artillery support it would be operating with.

No bro, it is just another hype.
First of all, it is getting more and more clear that a whole declaration was a carrot to make Germans bend.
Now we are talking about M1 to be delivered ... at the end of this year or early 24.
It is a joke.
Second, these whole Wunderwaffe courageous stories are getting boring.
Ukrs had its own tank not inferior to the M1A2, in numbers.
More than 100 pcs of T-64BM2 Bulat formed the bulk of modern Ukro tank forces, with the potential of upgrading the remaining hundreds of pcs in the arsenal.
Bulat is a very potent tank covered with a quite impressive heavy type of ERA called "Niż" - Knife. The whole idea of its operation makes it much more effective than Kontakt-5 panels. Its principal of operation is separating the explosive load inside the panel and making it explode in sequence. In an effect, the penetrator is being "cut" and dismantled to pieces before reaching the main armor. That will be quite effective even against the specially designed to be immune M829A3/4. The whole idea of "anti-heavy-ERA" penetrators was increasing the penetrator diameter, to make it more solid and withstand the breaking momentum of moving ERA plates. That is why late Soviet/Russian newly designed rounds have all thicker penetrators if compared to the western ones. Not because the stupid Russkie can't make a 22mm diameter rod, but knew how the heavy ERA works from the very beginning.
"Knife" just cuts penetrators with formed explosions.
Although vanilla Bulats still owned the LLTV camera based 1A45 fire control system with T01-K01ER night vision channel, it was only a matter of money to install the same Thales TI camera the Russians were using, that is Catherine. The thing is much better than M1A2 system, if someone is desperate enough to begin dick measurement contest.
Back in 2021, the first few pcs of T-64BM Krab, with new FCS including TI channel, were ready.





The thing retained GLATGM with new, Luch developed missile on pair with the latest Russian made missiles.

Ukrs have actually broken the impasse with a much more modern T-84BM Oplot, and in 2021 already called it "all-Ukrainian made" with the removal of all Russian supplied parts. Yet they had some 20 pcs of it.





So we face again the situation when Ukro MIC provided the armed forces with weapon systems much more potent and modern than those supplied by western Wunderwaffe that every fukin nafo gaylord is wanking about.

The Ukrainian army HAD much more potent tanks, in much bigger numbers, supplied by own industrial base and known to the maintenance teams.
Didn't helped them, tho ...

Bro, it is not "bankrupted Ukro MIC", to begin with.
All that works are rooted in Soviet times.
Morozov was a vibrant and potent tank hub for decades, it took a while to make them dead, you know.
All modern penetrators are made in jackets, so this is actually nothing new.
The point is that Murcans backward from 22mm diameter penetrators up to 25 or even 28 - to make them partially safe from K5 type of ERA the ideology of work they get in the early 90s.

If you wanna pen 700mm of armor you need lenght of penetrator to be 700+mm, depending of ehat material is made...
Only T90M have new autolader who are wider then the old one for use new 3BM59, 3BM60 APFSDS, because lenght of penetrators is more the 700mm...in old autoloader you can put only 640mm long penetrator in best scenario...
So yeah best ammo for old one is ild one 3BMs..not this newer ones...

It is not true.
3OF26 projectile is 677mm long.
3VBK10 is 680 mm long.
9K119 missile is 695 mm long.
Bulgarian made for 2A46 gun M2 APDS  projectile is 676mm.
T-72, 72A/M and M1 can use projectiles up to 680 mm - that is the size of a casette in carousel of AZ-172 autoloader.
T-72B can operate projectiles up to 695mm - the mounting hub of the carousel with it's steering and power supply is smaller, and rounds can stick out of it in the internal diameter. This applies to AZ-184 autoloader.
And again, T-72B3 mod. 2016  retained the 72B type of autoloader, yet it was modified to carry Svinets 1 and 2, because the thing was openly claimed in the tender documentation at rozsakupki and called "S-1" and "S-2" in the documentation.
That would make the system a hybrid with new, T-90 developed autoloader.

I have just realized one thing ...

Muricans are saying that they must produce the tanks, as they won't send the models from regular units due to the "secret" heavy DU-included armor suit.
That would mean, we talk about nothing else rather than ... M1A1.
DU elements appeared in M1A1HA version and were already in numbers by the Desert Storm ...
Soooooo if we are discussing the M1A1 at most ... it is getting ridiculous.
That represents the level of protection of vanilla T-64A and T-72M1.
Forget the 72B/BM, 80B/BW or 64B/BM.
Nope. Vanilla. Fukin'. Super. Dolly. Parton. Dot.
Russkie 72B3 will eat them alive.
The entire dispute about Russkie's newest rounds is getting irrelevant. It is steel with steel/rubber/air gaps NERA that BM32 or 42 pierces like a hot knife butter ...
Especially considering that those are manned by battle-hardened crews we can watch while annihilating entire Ukrowehrmacht columns.
In a solo concert
The sole tank that represents any advantage over Russkie most basic models is L2A6, yet it doesn't even come close to 90M which is being observed in really significant numbers.
A whole 15 pcs, yeah, that will teach them!

Another thing is the fact, that this shit will reconstruct the whole structure of Ukrowechrmacht armored units. They haven't trained loaders for the last 50 YEARS. Good luck loading the separated ammo of Ch2 while on the move and in battle with untrained loaders

I can't believe the shitload that is being pumped about something so much irrelevant

Russian tankers will pray that the artillery guys spare them some of the "supi-dupi sophisticated modern game-changing sophisticated western tanks".