Your Nation's Main Battle Tank [Part 2]

[Dostanuot Loj]

Because it is Russian.

Russians make shit tanks. Ukrainians have always been better.

The only reason the Russian tanks were slightly inferior was the fact that they did not possess the high-tech electronics that the American tanks had. The Russians made excellent tanks with lesser technology. End of story.

And also, who do you think the Ukrainians based their tank designs off of?

The Ukrainians.

Russian tanks, even in Soviet times, have always been inferior to Ukrainian ones. This dates back to the Russian SSR and Ukrainian SSR, and is true today. The T-90 is a watered-down T-80 (Or, more specifically, an improved T-72), and is not in equal ground. The Black Eagle was an attempt to improve the T-80, but was not such an improvement as more recent models of the T-84, and at best on par with early models of the T-84.

Nizhny Tagil has always played second fiddle to Morozov. Reality is, when comparing Russian tanks to Ukrainian ones, the Russian one is almost always inferior.

[Senestrum]

congrats on your 90+ tonne tank.

You cant use a HV ETI 140mm on 70 tonne range tanks without one helluva Muzzle Brake, let alone a 160mm.

And congratulations when coming to a river and the only bridge cant handle your tanks, or the permafrost terrain of some nations loots of options when it comes to that.

you can ford absurdly deep rivers

maus was supposed to be able to ford rivers 13 meters deep

also, when underwater ground pressure will be somewhat less due to buoyancy from the internal air

[Chernobyl-Pripyat]

Morozov was main producer, the T-80 was designed by a Russian..

They were responsible for the T-80UD however, which is a great improvement over the standard model since it doesn't burst into flames as quickly as other T-80 models

[Samozaryadnyastan]

In his defense there's only so many ways you can draw an MBT.

You can draw it so that it's not an exact copy. In fact, it's not a drawing, it's overlaying panels onto an existing image and changing the colour.
Tons of features on that are identical and taken from the original issues. He's covered up some with armour plate and additional MGs.

[Dostanuot Loj]

Morozov was main producer, the T-80 was designed by a Russian..

They were responsible for the T-80UD however, which is a great improvement over the standard model since it doesn't burst into flames as quickly as other T-80 models

T-80's reputation for bursting into flames is incorrect, and gleaned from its use in the Caucasus. Where, not surprisingly, the T-72 had the same problem. That problem being civilians with things that go boom.

That said, the T-80 was designed by a group of designers, from an offshoot design team of Morozov's (Intended to revive Lenningrad's previous tank-building capability). Lenningrad's tank industry being strongly tied to that of Ukraine. In that respect it is an exception to the rule, although it was never able to stand on its own outside the KV series. Even attempts to market the T-80 (Which they still cling to) have recently been broken by the Russian government after the break up of the Soviet Union.

[United States of PA]

I belive we are talking about a 90+ ton-tank rather then the abreams 67+ tons

You can make a 300 tonne tank with the same Ground Pressure as Abrams. All it requires is longer and wider tracks, and if you wish to go this route, smaller, interweaved roadwheels.

and when it comes to that it depends on the bridge itself as well to be said.

An when it comes you. pontoon bridges you are correct, the soviets could have built pontoon bridges over the volga into Stalingrad but they dident becouse they feared the germans would capture them and cross the river read it somwhere i belive, not <sure> exactly where or if the source was thrust-worthy.

They did build bridges across the Volga into Stalingrad to my knowledge. They were built just under the surface of the water to evade detection, and probably used only at night if i am correct in their existence.

Also, they reason they didn't build pontoon bridges was they would keep getting blown to bits by Arty or Stuka's the very next day, so it was simply easier to use boats and hope enough men got across, or wait for winter and the river to freeze.

They weren't sending tanks across the river after all. Heck, the Tractor Factory in the north of the city continued to produce tanks as long as possible, ran out by factory workers without paint or even gun sights to fight the Panzers. Chuikov fought mostly a infantry battle, and that was all that was really needed to cross the Volga. Men, and AT Guns were probably the heaviest needed.

The fear too my knowledge wasnt so much the Germans crossing the river with them, they could've done that anywhere up and down the river from the city, it was more a matter of impracticality and no real use for bridges of that size.

[Saphirasia]

I'm using MT. Also, how is a 'T-94' a downgrade from a T-84?

It's largely the replacement of the T-84s with the T-90. And the switch to gas turbines.

Exactly. Replace the current best with something better, and give the reservists better than what they had. Its what RL America did with the older model M1's. Gave the NG M1's to replace their M60's, and reequipped with M1A2's. Simple. And relatively cheap.

If you're going to use a single one, might as well do what the West did and use the biggest, baddest motherfucker you have. The T-80.

The T-80 didn't last too long. The T-84 was available soon after, and was a distinct improvement over the T-80 models. And besides, Its cheaper in the long run to give the reservist (Category B) units the slightly used, but still very effective, T-90's rather than equipping them ALL with the 'T-94'. That was suggested, but quickly struck down due to the fact that it cost almost 4 times as much.

[Western Weyard]

It's largely the replacement of the T-84s with the T-90. And the switch to gas turbines.

Exactly. Replace the current best with something better, and give the reservists better than what they had. Its what RL America did with the older model M1's. Gave the NG M1's to replace their M60's, and reequipped with M1A2's. Simple. And relatively cheap.

Uh... Just no.
T-90 is an upgraded T-72, while the T-84 is an upgraded T-80.
And since the T-80 (breakthrough tank in independent tank regiments) was designed to be a qualitatively better tank than the T-72 (infantry support tank in motorized rifle regiments)... Any questions?

[Estovakiva]

Exactly. Replace the current best with something better, and give the reservists better than what they had. Its what RL America did with the older model M1's. Gave the NG M1's to replace their M60's, and reequipped with M1A2's. Simple. And relatively cheap.

Uh... Just no.
T-90 is an upgraded T-72, while the T-84 is an upgraded T-80.
And since the T-80 (breakthrough tank in independent tank regiments) was designed to be a qualitatively better tank than the T-72 (infantry support tank in motorized rifle regiments)... Any questions?

Problem is a T-90 has T-72 features and T-80 features, so you are wrong at some-points.

[Western Weyard]

Problem is a T-90 has T-72 features and T-80 features, so you are wrong at some-points.

You're right.
But the use of a gas turbine in the T-90 disqualifies it as a useful tank, at least in my eyes. A GT can't do anything a large diesel engine couldn't do with better efficiency.
Compare Leo 2 and M1:
- Abrams (61.3t weight): 480km range with 1900l fuel, 72km/h top speed
- Leo 2 (62.3t weight): 550km range with 1200l fuel, 72km/h top speed

[United States of PA]

Still worse than T-80.

Also, T-90 uses Diesel.

[Western Weyard]

Still worse than T-80.

Also, T-90 uses Diesel.

Damn, got T-90 and first T-80 versions mixed up.
Thank for pointing out my mistake.

[United States of PA]

T-80UD, T-84 series, T-90, T-64, and T-72 all use Diesel

Russkie versions of the T-80 were the only ones to use GT

[Munathanura]

Uh... Just no.
T-90 is an upgraded T-72, while the T-84 is an upgraded T-80.
And since the T-80 (breakthrough tank in independent tank regiments) was designed to be a qualitatively better tank than the T-72 (infantry support tank in motorized rifle regiments)... Any questions?

Problem is a T-90 has T-72 features and T-80 features, so you are wrong at some-points.

To paraphrase Sumer, the Black Eagle, the Russian attempt at modernising and improving the T-80, was only as good as the early models of the T-84, which has since been improved. Furthermore, the T-90 is less capable than the T-80, mostly because it was designed for mass production.

Trust me, when Sumer says something, he knows what he's talking about. The study of tanks is what he does for a living.

[Saphirasia]

Problem is a T-90 has T-72 features and T-80 features, so you are wrong at some-points.

To paraphrase Sumer, the Black Eagle, the Russian attempt at modernising and improving the T-80, was only as good as the early models of the T-84, which has since been improved. Furthermore, the T-90 is less capable than the T-80, mostly because it was designed for mass production.

Trust me, when Sumer says something, he knows what he's talking about. The study of tanks is what he does for a living.

And its not possible to upgrade the old BE design with current tech? That's basically what is being done, using T-90/T-84(and some M1) tech to create a tank with the hardware qualities of a Russian tank, but with the American equipment needed to make it truly excellent.

[Munathanura]

To paraphrase Sumer, the Black Eagle, the Russian attempt at modernising and improving the T-80, was only as good as the early models of the T-84, which has since been improved. Furthermore, the T-90 is less capable than the T-80, mostly because it was designed for mass production.

Trust me, when Sumer says something, he knows what he's talking about. The study of tanks is what he does for a living.

And its not possible to upgrade the old BE design with current tech? That's basically what is being done, using T-90/T-84(and some M1) tech to create a tank with the hardware qualities of a Russian tank, but with the American equipment needed to make it truly excellent.

The point is that the T-84 has has a superior design and better build quality than the T-90, while also having better technology than it, even in the earliest versions. The modern versions of the T-84 are superior to the modern versions of the T-90, so changing from the T-84 to the T-90, instead of just upgrading the T-84, is actually a downgrade in terms of tank capability.

[United States of PA]

To paraphrase Sumer, the Black Eagle, the Russian attempt at modernising and improving the T-80, was only as good as the early models of the T-84, which has since been improved. Furthermore, the T-90 is less capable than the T-80, mostly because it was designed for mass production.

Trust me, when Sumer says something, he knows what he's talking about. The study of tanks is what he does for a living.

And its not possible to upgrade the old BE design with current tech? That's basically what is being done, using T-90/T-84(and some M1) tech to create a tank with the hardware qualities of a Russian tank, but with the American equipment needed to make it truly excellent.

The Russians wont use Ukrainian Tech (T80), let alone American Tech, wtf are you smoking, cuz i want some.

[Saphirasia]

And its not possible to upgrade the old BE design with current tech? That's basically what is being done, using T-90/T-84(and some M1) tech to create a tank with the hardware qualities of a Russian tank, but with the American equipment needed to make it truly excellent.

The Russians wont use Ukrainian Tech (T80), let alone American Tech, wtf are you smoking, cuz i want some.

I suppose i should mention that my country put together this design on its own, I'm not just buying them pre-built. The technology was integrated into the redesign.

[Saphirasia]

The Russians wont use Ukrainian Tech (T80), let alone American Tech, wtf are you smoking, cuz i want some.

I suppose i should mention that my country put together this design on its own, I'm not just buying them pre-built. The technology was integrated into the redesign.

The point is that the T-84 has has a superior design and better build quality than the T-90, while also having better technology than it, even in the earliest versions. The modern versions of the T-84 are superior to the modern versions of the T-90, so changing from the T-84 to the T-90, instead of just upgrading the T-84, is actually a downgrade in terms of tank capability.

Jeez, I'm using license-built vehicles here. There is such a thing as altering a design.
What can I say, I do things my way.

[Munathanura]

The point is that the T-84 has has a superior design and better build quality than the T-90, while also having better technology than it, even in the earliest versions. The modern versions of the T-84 are superior to the modern versions of the T-90, so changing from the T-84 to the T-90, instead of just upgrading the T-84, is actually a downgrade in terms of tank capability.

Jeez, I'm using license-built vehicles here. There is such a thing as altering a design.
What can I say, I do things my way.

My apologies, I wasn't able to read what you had posted after I wrote my post, and you didn't mention that at any prior point, so I was unable to realise what you were doing. Now, naturally, you can do things your way and use a T-90 with upgraded technology, but that doesn't change the fact that a T-84 that has been similarly upgraded and modified will be better. Still, it's your choice, and all I'm trying to do is to help you make the best, most informed choice possible.

[Terracielo]

I'm not really a tank expert... can anyone suggest a tank that's cheap, perhaps a little outdated but will still get the job done?

[Saphirasia]

Jeez, I'm using license-built vehicles here. There is such a thing as altering a design.
What can I say, I do things my way.

My apologies, I wasn't able to read what you had posted after I wrote my post, and you didn't mention that at any prior point, so I was unable to realise what you were doing. Now, naturally, you can do things your way and use a T-90 with upgraded technology, but that doesn't change the fact that a T-84 that has been similarly upgraded and modified will be better. Still, it's your choice, and all I'm trying to do is to help you make the best, most informed choice possible.

I appreciate that. Plus, doesn't the T-90 have a slightly lower profile?

[Yohannes]

I'm not really a tank expert... can anyone suggest a tank that's cheap, perhaps a little outdated but will still get the job done?

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=115353

Sounds like da deal broski.

On a more serious note mate, have you browse through real life tanks..? Otherwise, if what you meant by cheap tanks, means NS-grade wise, then that's one of the good one.

[Indeos]

I'm not really a tank expert... can anyone suggest a tank that's cheap, perhaps a little outdated but will still get the job done?

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=115353

Sounds like da deal broski.

On a more serious note mate, have you browse through real life tanks..? Otherwise, if what you meant by cheap tanks, means NS-grade wise, then that's one of the good one.

I don't think anything Lyras sells is really cheap or outdated. The T-72 is supposedly not bad for RL tanks, but really the best person to ask is Sumer/Dostanuot Loj.

[Munathanura]

I'm not really a tank expert... can anyone suggest a tank that's cheap, perhaps a little outdated but will still get the job done?

Probably the T-72B, in conjunction with Kontakt-5 ERA and a few 9M119 Svir Gun-Launched ATGM (GLATGM)s.