Russian Photos (updated on regular basis)

[TR1]

Nobody says they are.

But they are definitely getting closer and closer.

Eh. Just because they have stopped making T-55 clones....

as GSP would say, " I am not impressed with your performance".

Making tanks close to USSR levels of late 80s isn't that great.

We had a discussion here, with Damien, that their latest armor layout is actually rather poor and shows many amateurish design flaws.

http://andrei-bt.livejournal.com/728.html

Good article about this.

[marmot]

Eh. Just because they have stopped making T-55 clones....

as GSP would say, " I am not impressed with your performance".

Making tanks close to USSR levels of late 80s isn't that great.

I generally agree with you, and I will study your article later in the evening.

But: Type-99A3 is still a huge leap forward.
Hard to say with only little hard data available on A3, but we can
safely assume it is better than T-72 and probably somewhere near T-80.

The next one will be better than Russian tanks, as I strongly suspect
we would not see T-95 any time soon.

PS I've been impressed with that recent close-up photo I posted on the
previous page, the new tank looks like solid-made modern MBT. Of course
there are flaws as they don't have much experience yet.

[Raden5]

No photos, but too curious ... current tenders "weapon":
- 9 mm pistol GSh-18 (6P54) 20 units = 500000 rubles (~834$ one)
- Leica CRF 1200 19 units = 475000 rubles (~834$ one)
- Delivery of dried apricots, pitted GOST 28501-90 (I'm not mad - part "weapon") 2000kg = 220000 rubles (~ 7334$)
- Pickled cucumbers (Yes, yes ... weapons) number - unknown = 340000 rubles (~11334$)
- Side mounting brackets on the AK with picatinny rail (general - "pikatiny" officially in Russia there) 45 units = 200000 rubles (~ 150$ one)
- Purchase holster universal (loin attachment) for various types of weapons... number - unknown = 160200 rubles (~ 5340$)
- Implementation of experimental design work on the theme "Development of sets of models rocket complex Iskander-M and anti-aircraft missile complex "Buk" (Ha ... be "inflatable" Iskander ... ) = 23747500 rubles (~791583$)
- Delivery of spare parts for weapons, knives... (curious position) - "gadgets for ... automaton AK103 = 125 pieces" (and said - AK-103 for the entire export?) .... "fighting knife "SMERSH-5" = 180" (sure - they will kill someone) .... again "Leica LRF-1200"= 47 (very popular ) .... "collimator scope = 683" (seriously) ... etc. Total = 48098647 rubles (~1603288$)
- Delivery of 7.62-mm sniper rifle cartridges (7.62x54R, 7.62x51???) ... unknown = 172893 rubles (~ 5763$)
- Car and vehicle armor for the needs of the MIA of Russia (positions are closed) = 170586680 rubles (~5686223$)

That's ...

[Kunal Biswas]

few Mig-29KUB shots back from spring, when indian pilots were training in Lukhovitsy

Thanks for these beautiful photos !!!!

[Universals]

I generally agree with you, but Type-99A3 is still a huge leap forward.
Hard to say with only little hard date available on A3, but we can
safely assume it is better than T-72 and probably somewhere near T-80.

The next one will be better than Russian tanks, as I strongly suspect
we would not see T-95 any time soon.

So what makes T-80 better than T-72?

where does T-90 fit in your argument ( that's if you really have one at all)?

and how do you know that T-95 isn't near production?

[Raden5]

and how do you know that T-95 isn't near production?

And he passed the test? Adopted on armaments?

[marmot]

So what makes T-80 better than T-72?

where does T-90 fit in your argument ( that's if you really have one at all)?

and how do you know that T-95 isn't near production?

T-80 was a concurrent design with T-72, where T-80 was
more expensive and was intended for use in front-line units,
whereas T-72 was more economical and intended for use in
the 2-nd and 3-rd echelon troops. Obviously, T-80 was better
than T-72, then.

T-80 had much more advanced armor and a fast vertical auto-loader.
And of course GT engine.

T-90 is an advanced development of T-72, T-80 line is discontinued,
with some hulls still produced (?) for the "Msta-S" SPH.

But I believe those are well-known facts?

Where T-90 stands in comparison to T-72 I don't exactly know,
but I suspect it is significantly more advanced. But again:
ammo stored within armor body, one penetration and everyone
inside is dead...

[ViceStan]

T-80 was a concurrent design with T-72, where T-80 was
more expensive and was intended for use in front-line units,
whereas T-72 was more economical and intended for use in
the 2-nd and 3-rd echelon troops. Obviously, T-80 was better
than T-72, then.

T-80 had much more advanced armor and a fast vertical auto-loader.
And of course GT engine.

T-90 is an advanced development of T-72, T-80 line is discontinued,
with some hulls still produced (?) for the "Msta-S" SPH.

But I believe those are well-known facts?

Where T-90 stands in comparison to T-72 I don't exactly know,
but I suspect it is significantly more advanced. But again:
ammo stored within armor body, one penetration and everyone
inside is dead...

You should check out tanknet.org before speaking your mind.

[RBI]

Thanks for these beautiful photos !!!!

You're welcome =)

[Redbeard]

I think the emphasis was on the sexiness, not the age.

SEXEY!

[MZKT]

Nobody says they are.

Indeed. They may be already above T-90s level.

The few things known of Type-99 are corresponding to known parameters of T-90 (same gun and drivetrain, stronger engine, Gen2 ERA, advanced laser protective suite, digital FCS...). Since the armor of both tanks is classified, it's impossible to say which is better protected.

I recon those tanks on the photo are Type-99A3, sporting
impressive 62-tons combat weight and 85 km/h top speed.

Top speed is BS, not achievable with given hp/weight ratio. Leclerc with better power/weight ratio is rated for 70 km/h.

T-90 is an advanced development of T-72, T-80 line is discontinued,
with some hulls still produced (?) for the "Msta-S" SPH.

mSTA-S use an other hull which has some components from t-80 and t-72.

Where T-90 stands in comparison to T-72 I don't exactly know,
but I suspect it is significantly more advanced. But again:
ammo stored within armor body, one penetration and everyone
inside is dead...

Depends on T-72 version. T-72M1M for example is more advanced then T-90 (which itseld is a renamed T-72BU).

If only autoloader ammo is in use only a penetration in the lower quarter of the tank would result in an ammo explosion, this area is usually covered by terrain and is anyway protected by the roadwheels.

So regarding ammo explosions T-72 is even safer then tanks with exposed bustle, of course if an explosion occurs, the consequences are deadly.

[Raden5]

On the Rights of the advertising ...

When President Medvedev had been on maneuvers West 2009 he was given (sold) knife.

As specialists said - a combat knife Katran

produced by "Noks" http://noksknife.ru/
So what I recommend...

[marmot]

Indeed. They may be already above T-90s level.

The few things known of Type-99 are corresponding to known parameters of T-90 (same gun and drivetrain, stronger engine, Gen2 ERA, advanced laser protective suite, digital FCS...). Since the armor of both tanks is classified, it's impossible to say which is better protected.

I was under impression that Type-99 is mainly a development of T-80,
but it still has a horizontal autoloader of T-72 and T-90, doesn't it?
Would be interesting to know the rate of fire, but I strongly suspect
it is the same with T-90.

I also believe that a 140mm gun is soon coming for Type-99 as they keep
experimenting with new turrets.

[Sashko]

Fs, I was saying that because the F16 is often considered as a "sexy" plane while it is an even older plane than the 29..

Single engine and sexy? Heresy!

[TR1]

T-72B has better armor than any T-80B and prior model.