T-90 Main Battle Tank #2

09/16/2022
Izvestia.ru
"Breakthrough" - before the end of the year: the western direction will be reinforced with T-90M tanks



New equipment will be a response to the deployment of NATO forces in the region

The Russian Defense Ministry will equip new units in the western direction with the most modern T-90M Proryv tanks. According to the main characteristics, they are not inferior to the promising T-14 "Armata". The military department has already announced the emergence of new army formations in the Western Military District (ZVO) as a response to NATO actions. According to experts, today tanks are still considered the main weapon of the battlefield, and the Breakthrough is the most modern vehicle that surpasses many analogues in foreign countries.
Ordered to the West

The number of the latest T-90M "Breakthrough" tanks in the ZVO will be increased, Izvestia's sources in the military department said. The fundamental decision to supply the latest combat vehicles has already been made. The timing of the deployment of additional "Breakthroughs" will depend on the implementation of the state defense order. "Nineties-Emki" will go both to re-equip existing military units, and will go to the newly formed ones.



The build-up of Russian troops on the western frontiers began only in the last decade. Prior to that, for a long time the capital was practically not covered. In Soviet times, the Moscow Military District was the rear. When, after 1991, it became a border division, it turned out that the only forces west of Moscow were the "court" Taman motorized rifle and Kantemirovskaya tank divisions. In the future, the strengthening of the western borders began. The First Guards Tank Army was recreated, new units and formations were formed. In May last year, the head of the Russian Defense Ministry, Sergei Shoigu, announced that by January 1, 2022, about 20 new formations and units would appear in the Western Military District. He called it a response to the activity of NATO countries, led by the United States, which are increasing the intensity of flights and the presence of warships near Russian borders.

“The actions of our Western colleagues are destroying the security system in the world and are forcing us to take adequate countermeasures. We are constantly improving the combat composition of the troops,” the minister said and promised to equip the troops with 2,000 units of modern equipment and weapons systems.

Exactly one year later, on May 20, 2022, the head of the military department announced that by the end of December, Russia would form 12 new military units in the Western Military District against the backdrop of threats at the borders. According to him, these threats are growing: only the intensity of US strategic aviation flights in Europe has increased 15 times, and the visits of US Navy ships to the Baltic Sea have become systematic. Among the threats, the minister also named Finland and Sweden joining NATO. Shoigu added that this year the troops of the Western Military District will receive more than 2,000 units of modern weapons and military equipment.



“It is clear that some of the units being created will belong to the ground forces, some to air defense, some to aviation,” military expert Alexei Leonkov explained to Izvestia. - What exactly will be created is still unknown. But if we talk about ground units, then it is impossible to do without armored units. In addition, we must understand that in the West, in the event of a hypothetical conflict, not Soviet vehicles will fight against us, as they do now, but NATO tanks: Leclercs, or Leopards, or Abrams.
There are no equals against these T-90 tanks. Although there were never any military clashes with them. But "Breakthrough" has already been made taking into account the combat capabilities of promising anti-tank systems, it has a new dynamic protection system. And besides, he received new ammunition, including sub-caliber feathered shells.

Recently, tanks have become one of the main weapons of the battlefield, military expert Vladislav Shurygin reminded Izvestia.

- This is the only artillery system that can confidently and effectively operate directly under enemy fire. The T-90M "Breakthrough" is a very powerful machine, which is considered one of the best in the world. Such machines are needed on the western frontier. But in the event of a conflict, we will act in the south, where there are forest-steppes and steppes. And there tanks show their best side. The creation of new military units in the Western Military District is a response to the strengthening of the NATO grouping near the borders of Russia. We cannot afford to be limited to the same composition as before, the expert explained.

Breakthrough character

The T-90M "Breakthrough" is the most modern representative of Russian tank building in service. According to its characteristics, it is almost identical to the "tank of the future" T-14 "Armata", only slightly inferior in terms of driving performance and armor protection. But the firepower of both machines is about the same. The upgraded T-90M is equipped with an improved 2A46M5-01 gun and a powerful diesel engine. The machine is equipped with an automated fire control system "Kalina" and a remotely controlled anti-aircraft machine gun "Kord-MT".

The upgraded vehicle and its crew are much more protected than the T-72 and T-80 family tanks. Anti-fragmentation screens made of Kevlar fabric are installed inside the fighting compartment, and the main ammunition load is placed in a special box behind the turret. In addition, armor has been noticeably enhanced.

Since the middle of the last decade, the military department has been conducting a kind of rotation of the Russian tank fleet. Machines of the T-80 family with gas turbine engines are sent to serve in the Far East and the Arctic, in the conditions of which they show exceptional reliability. And the T-72B3 tanks serve in a less severe climate. However, in recent years, the Ministry of Defense has been replacing these vehicles with the T-90M Proryv. All T-90s that are in operation are brought to this modification. In 2020, tank units of the Taman Guards Motorized Rifle Division received new vehicles, in the past - the 27th Separate Sevastopol Motorized Rifle Brigade from the capital.

Izvestia has already written that the military department will reinforce the troops of the Western Military District with units of Mi-8AMTSh-VN Sapsan helicopters. They provide special forces operations, and are also capable of delivering high-precision strikes in the rear of a potential enemy. "Peregrine falcons" can operate in any weather day and night.



https://vpk.name/news/631510_proryv_do_konca_goda_zapadnoe_napravlenie_usilyat_tankami_t-90m.html

Podlodka77 wrote:
According to the main characteristics, they are not inferior to the promising T-14 "Armata".

That's a laugh.

The T-90M cannot even fire the Armata's rounds.

The tank is basically a dead end with no potential for improvement say for the addition of an APS.

Russia should be prepared that NATO will soon design APFSDS shells that will smash clean through the T-90M's composite and reactive armor, once the captured T-90M is brought to the west. It will be a similar situation like when the M829A2, M829A3, DM63 and DM73 completely defeated the kontakt 5 armor, making russian ERA useless against NATO tanks until relikt came along. Now relikt will be useless too.

limb wrote:Russia should be prepared that NATO will soon design APFSDS shells that will smash clean through the T-90M's composite and reactive armor, once the captured T-90M is brought to the west.  It will be a similar situation like when the M829A2, M829A3, DM63 and DM73 completely defeated the kontakt 5 armor, making russian ERA useless against NATO tanks until relikt came along. Now relikt will be useless too.

You don't need to have an actual tank to design a round that can destroy it.

Most basic apfsds can destroy a t-90M if you don't hit the hardest part of tank which represent not even 20% of its surface and is always the front. Same for any tank. A mango shell on the side of a m1a1 will go through easily.

And in modern war real enemy of tanks are ATGMs.

In Ukraine and Syria most important job of tanks is supporting infantry with HE shells.

Isos wrote:

You don't need to have an actual tank to design a round that can destroy it.

Most basic apfsds can destroy a t-90M if you don't hit the hardest part of tank which represent not even 20% of its surface and is always the front. Same for any tank. A mango shell on the side of a m1a1 will go through easily.

And in modern war real enemy of tanks are ATGMs.

In Ukraine and Syria most important job of tanks is supporting infantry with HE shells.

Would be nice to see the numbers of what weapons system killed most of the tanks and IFVs.

My guess would be that ATGM, RPG, Artillery are all top 3 candidates, somewhere in the middle field mines and immobilization due to being stuck /abandoning the vehicle while tank vs tank is competing with drones for the last place.

The-thing-next-door wrote:
That's a laugh.

The T-90M cannot even fire the Armata's rounds.

The tank is basically a dead end with no potential for improvement say for the addition of an APS.

Is there any threat with Armata level protection that you would need an Armata level firepower for?

If not, then the T-90M's armament is perfectly fine.

Werewolf wrote:
My guess would be that ATGM, RPG, Artillery are all top 3 candidates, somewhere in the middle field mines and immobilization due to being stuck /abandoning the vehicle while tank vs tank is competing with drones for the last place.

Its probably 90% artillery at this point, at least for the Russians. Mostly using Krasnopol shells too.

Yeah Russia does not yet need Armata. Though I think they need to focus a bit more energy in getting it to pass military trials. Has it done this yet? Are they still having issues with the APS?

TMA1 wrote:Yeah Russia does not yet need Armata. Though I think they need to focus a bit more energy in getting it to pass military trials. Has it done this yet? Are they still having issues with the APS?

I wouldn't say that it is not needed. Maybe not critically needed, but considering developments around Ukraine and all, i believe that best units should get Armata. 
In any case, Army being most important branch of Russian army in the case of conventional war, didn't get as much money for modernisation as it should, imo.

TMA1 wrote:Yeah Russia does not yet need Armata. Though I think they need to focus a bit more energy in getting it to pass military trials. Has it done this yet? Are they still having issues with the APS?

Don't worry, their pacing is fine. When serial production starts in earnest around mid-2020 of the entire Armata platform it would be received by a complete ecosystem with a battle tested doctrine, cadres of trained and experienced crews, and a support infrastructure that has been tested through the demands of a high intensity conflict.

Instead, it is the West that is scrambling for a response. Look at their ersatz-Armatas - they even brought back the radio operator! At least provide some upper hemisphere protection against Krasnopols ffs.

If western weapons could easily clean up Russian tanks they would be doing so right now...

If western APFSDS rounds were up to scratch why are their new tanks mounting bigger guns?

Even having access to enemy armour you still have to design a round that will penetrate it... and that new round could be defeated simply by an extra ERA layer or APS system, or simply changing the materials used and the order they are fitted.

The real feature of Armata is that it is a chassis family where an armata division will be equipped with like protected and like mobile armour... the Armata divisions are not going to be the fastest a most mobile forces... I would expect the Kurganets and Boomerang units would be well protected and highly mobile and with excellent fire power.

limb wrote:Russia should be prepared that NATO will soon design APFSDS shells that will smash clean through the T-90M's composite and reactive armor, once the captured T-90M is brought to the west.  It will be a similar situation like when the M829A2, M829A3, DM63 and DM73 completely defeated the kontakt 5 armor, making russian ERA useless against NATO tanks until relikt came along. Now relikt will be useless too.

The T-90M in enemy hands is no problem...the tank is a example for evolution, not revolution (the Armata is a revolutionary tank). I think no aspect of the tank is really new to NATO. The T-90M is so good, because of the whole package...you get a lot of bang for very few bucks...NATO countries can't replicate it, their tanks are too expensive in every way.  

Yes maybe they will find solutions to negate Relikt, but this will take a few years. During this time the Armata will show up....and it's the beginning of a whole new family with huge upgrade potential.

The-thing-next-door wrote:

Podlodka77 wrote:
According to the main characteristics, they are not inferior to the promising T-14 "Armata".

That's a laugh.

The T-90M cannot even fire the Armata's rounds.

The tank is basically a dead end with no potential for improvement say for the addition of an APS.

What an all around stupid comment. And I will not elaborate.

Azi wrote:

limb wrote:Russia should be prepared that NATO will soon design APFSDS shells that will smash clean through the T-90M's composite and reactive armor, once the captured T-90M is brought to the west.  It will be a similar situation like when the M829A2, M829A3, DM63 and DM73 completely defeated the kontakt 5 armor, making russian ERA useless against NATO tanks until relikt came along. Now relikt will be useless too.

The T-90M in enemy hands is no problem...the tank is a example for evolution, not revolution (the Armata is a revolutionary tank). I think no aspect of the tank is really new to NATO. The T-90M is so good, because of the whole package...you get a lot of bang for very few bucks...NATO countries can't replicate it, their tanks are too expensive in every way.  

Yes maybe they will find solutions to negate Relikt, but this will take a few years. During this time the Armata will show up....and it's the beginning of a whole new family with huge upgrade potential.

Russians should have a protocol for destroying equipment in case they need to abandon them.

Eh, you win some you lose some. Its just a tank, and it even has its replacement in line, so no biggie. If we're talking about untimely reveals of capabilities it still wouldn't be enough to match the L that is NATO giving the Russians a front row seat at the NATO C4ISR in practice.

The T-90M in enemy hands is no problem...the tank is a example for evolution, not revolution (the Armata is a revolutionary tank). I think no aspect of the tank is really new to NATO. The T-90M is so good, because of the whole package...you get a lot of bang for very few bucks...NATO countries can't replicate it, their tanks are too expensive in every way.

HATO tanks are equivalent, superior in some aspects and inferior in others... but also 20 tons heavier.

Western tanks rely on heavy armour for good protection, while the Soviets and Russians used different solutions like ERA like APS like Shtora, none of which were amazing to begin with but as they got better they form different layers that each became significant and much better and more effective... ERA went from HEAT defeating only to HEAT and APFSDS defeating... APS went from stopping slow HEAT rounds only to being able to deal with a wider range of threats, and when you add all these layers of defence in many ways they cancel each others weaknesses out and make their strengths even stronger.

Composite armour is one layer but on its own you need lots of it and it is heavy which makes your tank big and heavy... adding ERA and APS and an unmanned turret means enormous weight and size savings that can go into better armour for the crew in the hull.

There is no such thing as the perfect tank... all tanks can be defeated including the T-14, but the number of things that can reliably defeat it is much smaller than the number of things that can deal with less capable tanks... and more importantly it is designed and equipped to do some serious damage to the enemy too.

Russians should have a protocol for destroying equipment in case they need to abandon them.

The level of technology in them these days I would think without the pass code it will be about as much use as someone elses smart phone you found on the street.

Sure there is stuff you can do to hack it, but a tank is not a smart phone and how hard would it be to adapt the software... a modern tank is a node in a network... when you boot up properly you join a shared information space, but what happens when you boot up without the right codes... have it transmit a signal to friendly vehicles on the network your position and disable your fire control system so you miss everything you fire at until the correct code is entered?

The vehicle has radios to communicate with other vehicles and aircraft so signalling your position to friendly aircraft for attack if you are being moved... perhaps turn on the cameras so they can see how many enemy troops are nearby so they know when to launch an Iskander with a cluster bomb warhead to take the tank out and everything around it with HEAT submunitions...

That will be up to the Russian military.

It seems that the most important upgrade all Russian tanks in service need are new transmissions with decent reverse speeds. Current ones, especially on t-72 variants are a joke.

diabetus wrote:It seems that the most important upgrade all Russian tanks in service need are new transmissions with decent reverse speeds. Current ones, especially on t-72 variants are a joke.

The low reverse speed on the T-72 was done on purpose to prevent drivers with lack of experience from backing up at high speed and crashing into things. Now that we have driver cameras and crash sensors I am not sure if the problem is as critical as it used to be.

lancelot wrote:

diabetus wrote:It seems that the most important upgrade all Russian tanks in service need are new transmissions with decent reverse speeds. Current ones, especially on t-72 variants are a joke.

The low reverse speed on the T-72 was done on purpose to prevent drivers with lack of experience from backing up at high speed and crashing into things. Now that we have driver cameras and crash sensors I am not sure if the problem is as critical as it used to be.

this conflict has proven that it also has the unfortunate side effect of causing drivers to turn the tank around rather than backing away from the enemy, exposing thin rear armor.

diabetus wrote:
this conflict has proven that it also has the unfortunate side effect of causing drivers to turn the tank around rather than backing away from the enemy, exposing thin rear armor.

Panic or the issue that they only have one reverse gear.

Werewolf wrote:

diabetus wrote:
this conflict has proven that it also has the unfortunate side effect of causing drivers to turn the tank around rather than backing away from the enemy, exposing thin rear armor.

Panic or the issue that they only have one reverse gear.

Usually it seems to happen when being hit by indirect fire.

On the T-90M, does the turret bustle have a door to the crew compartment which allows the crew to take from it to load the carousel, or does the crew have to get out of the tank in order to access it?

Get out and then bring the ammo inside.

Too bad they didn't make it with a loader. Would make the tank safer.