Oplot T-84 performance in Ukraine conflict

Tolstoy wrote:I see a whole lot of you on this forum heap praise on the T-84 Oplot. Why is that? The reason why Ukraine had to import NATO tanks is because the T-84 is mostly a failure.

It is the first Ukrainian tank to have satnav and datalinks but at the end of the day it was supposed to be a  prototype which the Ukrainians couldn't fund themselves but received orders for MBTS so they diverted that amount  to start the project. This magazine provides the details. Don't have time to translate everything but the important point here is about the various prototypes of that were created for decades before they finally arrived at the T-84.

Who the hell has been praising the T-84 Oplot? All 10 of them?

flamming_python wrote:
Who the hell has been praising the T-84 Oplot? All 10 of them?

You are losing your common sense and acting like Pavlov's dog style.
Oplot is a 30 y/o story.
And yes, it was a decent tank back then. Achieved export success second to T-90 only.
Making a fact that a project was in a constant state of development disadvantage requires a really flexible state of mind.
Oplot is Ukrainized T-80UD. No more, no less. You all can go now and throw some shit on T-80UD, would be fun to read!

ALAMO wrote:
You are losing your common sense and acting like Pavlov's dog style.
Oplot is a 30 y/o story.
And yes, it was a decent tank back then. Achieved export success second to T-90 only.
Making a fact that a project was in a constant state of development disadvantage requires a really flexible state of mind.
Oplot is Ukrainized T-80UD. No more, no less. You all can go now and throw some shit on T-80UD, would be fun to read!

Never said it wasn't a decent tank, I frankly have no idea as not once have I seen this model being used in this war. They're probably all busy guarding Zelensky.

Hardly, Ukrs have a dozen or so of those at their disposal. Half of them flamed back in 2014+ already.
Maybe you are mixing them with Bulats
Never offend the enemies, because you will look stupid losing.

We are watching that now, with every single western Wunderwaffe debunked. One by one.
Oplot was just fine. Bulat was just fine.
Ukrainians constructed several very interesting weapon types but ended up nowhere due to corruption and lack of political leverage.
This fate was assisting Russkie for a long time either. No need to laugh.

ALAMO wrote:Hardly, Ukrs have a dozen or so of those at their disposal. Half of them flamed back in 2014+ already.
Maybe you are mixing them with Bulats
Never offend the enemies, because you will look stupid losing.

We are watching that now, with every single western Wunderwaffe debunked. One by one.
Oplot was just fine. Bulat was just fine.
Ukrainians constructed several very interesting weapon types but ended up nowhere due to corruption and lack of political leverage.
This fate was assisting Russkie for a long time either. No need to laugh.

Never seen the Ukrainians use the Oplot, or any of their T-80s. Frankly don't know where the hell they've all gone.

As for their T-64s, I wouldn't dream of offending them. The 2018 or 2019 modernization of the T-64 in particular is a fine tank, including in LDNR service where several captured examples of which have been put into service.
Armour is one thing the Ukrainians did well. The Kharkov plant, when it was still operational, was modernizing and servicing a whole bunch of these tanks, and had its own design bureau with its own ERA, armour, etc.. patents.

flamming_python wrote:
Never seen the Ukrainians use the Oplot, or any of their T-80s. Frankly don't know where the hell they've all gone.
As for their T-64s, I wouldn't dream of offending them. The 2018 or 2019 modernization of the T-64 in particular is a fine tank, including in LDNR service where several captured examples of which have been put into service.
Armour is one thing the Ukrainians did well. The Kharkov plant, when it was still operational, was modernizing and servicing a whole bunch of these tanks, and had its own design bureau with its own ERA, armour, etc.. patents.

There was some wrecked back in 2014+
But they had so few of those, that it could just fly by anyone's attention.

Tolstoy wrote:I see a whole lot of you on this forum heap praise on the T-84 Oplot. Why is that? The reason why Ukraine had to import NATO tanks is because the T-84 is mostly a failure.

It is the first Ukrainian tank to have satnav and datalinks but at the end of the day it was supposed to be a  prototype which the Ukrainians couldn't fund themselves but received orders for MBTS so they diverted that amount  to start the project. This magazine provides the details. Don't have time to translate everything but the important point here is about the various prototypes of that were created for decades before they finally arrived at the T-84.

The T-84 is garbage.

Firepower is dogshit: Ukraine lacks the metallurgical expertise to produce a decent high-pressure smoothbore gun. The "KBA-3" can barely shoot the 40 year old 3BM42 subcaliber - and don't get me started on the ammunition. The basic T-72B3 btw, is armed with a modern 2A46M-5 gun and can fire the latest subcaliber shells except for those specifically designed for the T-14. Yes, the baseline Russian tank is far more lethal than Ukraine's best.

Armor is also crap. Ukraine's brand of ERA has shown poor effectiveness in actual combat compared to the old Soviet solutions - which is why most of their tanks use Kontakt-1 and Kontakt-5 instead of that garbage Nizh that only works in "tests". They also, don't weigh a **** ton that you have to remove the composite armor just to make the weight cut. Literal retard design bureau hours in Kharkov...

ALAMO wrote:
Objectively speaking, Obiekt 478DU9-1 and 478DU10, with PNK-6 panoramic sight and powerpack is better in some aspects than all Russian mods other than T-90M. Starting with reverse gears Laughing Laughing (a joke, you know?)
What was a problem, was the fact that Ukraine was not able to finance the project properly, ending up with a whole of 11 pcs ever produced. Out of which, four were sold to the US (two of those with Drozd APS system), one was rebuilt as Jatagan with 120 mm KBM-2 gun, and one was kept in Kiev armed forces academy, leaving a whole 5 pcs in ranks.
And a few Oplot M has been included in the arms plan only after 2009 ...

And the main armament of the greatest T-84 variant is worse than the 40 year old 2A46M...

Not really surprising given that Ukraine has troubles manufacturing 120 mm mortars. A product that is simply much less demanding internal ballistics-wise.

They call it the iron triangle - to have a good tank you need a balanced trio of firepower, armor, and mobility - arguably networking and automation are no less important.

You need a baseline level of lethality to compete in the first place that the T-84BM simply could not deliver.

It can't be worse, as it is the same gun
But that is true that Ukrainians never developed more potent 125mm gun and are some 40 years behind Russkie.
The same applies to ammunition, but it is not so bad in this case - they can always use Polish made, that can pierce about 620mm. It might not be the best one can get, still much better than Vant and Mango.
The third potential disadvantage would be the main armor composition, as Ukraine obviously lacked modern chemical industry and real modern metallurgy. I would set it at a level equal to T-72BM/80U. But again, as it might not be a world champion, it is still a solid base.
I would not be so sure about that, as for the whole 90s, they have cooperated with GIAT. And there was a clear weight increase for each next version of T-84.