Posted on 05/24/2022 7:43:21 AM PDT by BBQToadRibs2
The BMPT-72, or Terminator 2, is fitted with a new unmanned fully stabilized electromechanical turret, with a lower profile and better protection. The main armament of the BMPT-72 turret consists of two 30mm automatic 2A42 guns and one PKTM 7.62mm coaxial machine gun which can be used against light armored vehicles and manpower. The guns can fire a wide range of ammunitions such as APERS-T (Anti-Personnel ammunitions), HEF-I (High-explosive Fragmentation Incendiary), AP-T (Armour Piercing)., and KE (Kinetic Energy). Two Ataka-T anti-tank guided missile launchers are mounted on each side of the turret. The 9M1201 missiles can be armed with two types of warhead: hollow-charge, and high-explosive concrete-piercing. The BMPT-72 is equipped with a computerized fire control system with a multichannel sighting system and weapon high-accuracy laying systems. The vehicle carries 850 rounds for the 30mm guns and 2,100 rounds for the 7.62mm machine gun. The turret protection includes armored shields for the missiles, protecting them from splinters and the firing of small arms. The turret can be rotated at 360 ° with an elevation from -5° to +25° for the anti-tank missiles, and from -5° to +45° for the guns and coaxial machine gun. The anti-tank missiles can engage a target up to a maximum distance of 6,000 m while the guns have a maximum range of 2,500 against light armored vehicles and 4,000 m against light tactical vehicles and troops. A screening system increases the self-protection of the BMPT-72 which is designed to counter laser target-designators and laser rangefinders. Six smoke grenade launchers are mounted on each side of the turret. When the screening system warns the crew of laser tracking, a smoke screen is created by the launch of grenades.
(Excerpt) Read more at armyrecognition.com ...
MBT’s by themselves are deathtraps. MBT’s in an integrated air/ground battle situation are death dealers. They simply need air, infantry, artillery, and drone support. Any part of that on its own is vulnerable.
So Russian tank design peaked with the T-34 in 1940 and the subsequent T-34 tweaks. Good to know.
Better a ground pounder than a Russian tanker!
I was always lead to believe that the T-34 was the best tank of WWII. Information suggests otherwise, and most ‘experts’ disagree about this. Many suggest that the American Sherman was more versatile, more reliable, and had good hitting power and better crew survive-ability than the T-34. Russian tankers actually preferred the Sherman to the T-34 when given the choice.
I would say the T-60 was a breakout design. Probably the best jump forward. However, the auto-loader appears to be reliable, but crew stored ammunition appears to be a bad idea. So, I don’t know anymore.
Military equipment is a matter of improvement followed by a counter improvement.
Assuming you mean the clean looking one with the arms expo “desert camo” it’s a BMPT-72. driver’s hatch in the middle, no 30mm grenade launchers. I have built models of a 1 and 2.
Doctrine is 1 BMPT per 2 T-90s in the field and 2 BMPTs per 1 tank in urban settings.
The 30s can elevate much higher than a tank gun in order to clear rooftops. Also probably a quicker reaction time against MANPAD ATGMs than a main gun tank round and more lead on target to disrupt the aim of any wire guided system.
The ATGMs can also be anti personel.
Still need infantry with them as obviously visibility when buttoned up is crap. Always has been.
BTW in the first picture the bags on the side are add-on reactive armor. Seen them on -2s in Syria.
When designing the T-34 the Soviets prioritized armor (tank survivability), firepower and ease of use and maintenance above all else.
The T-34 was...
The first tank to make full use of sloped armor enabling more protection from less weight. The 45-60 mm of armor (compared to the 3-7 inches on the Sherman) was sloped at up to 60 degrees.
Carried an 85 mm high velocity main gun that equaled the German 88. By comparison the Sherman carried a 76 mm low velocity gun that was was like a popgun compared to the others. Rounds from Sherman’s actually bounced off the front and sides of German tanks.
The T-34 was designed to be easy for an uneducated Russian peasant to learn how to operate and maintain. When the vast majority of your population MAY be able to write their names, simplicity is a godsend.
Had a low profile and wide tracks. The low profile speaks for itself, can’t shoot at me until you see me.
The wide tracks were needed for the terrain in eastern Europe, including Germany.
The Sherman had a VERY high profile for it’s tonnage, as high as the Tiger which was 25 tons heavier. The Sherman’s narrow tracks were designed for western Europe and had problems in soft, loamy soil.
With all that the only place the Sherman was better was crew comfort. Compared to the average Russian tank design the Sherman was luxurious in comparison.
Think of it this way....
An English veteran of the war said you didn’t fly a Spitfire, you WORE a Spitfire.
The T-34 was an I inhale you exhale, get your foot out of my eye and whoever farts gets shot when we get out of here experience.
When the Sherman was proposed and okayed they were projected to go up against the panzer Mark III’s and IV’s. The Panthers and Tigers ate’em for breakfast and wanted more.
The only advantage, except to the crew, was the Sherman was cheap and easy to produce.
When the British first used the Sherman in North Africa the Brits nicknamed them the Ronson because “it lights first time and every time.”
The Germans affectionately called them “Tommy cookers.”
The problems with the T-60 go back to the Russian lack of concern for the crew. Storing the ammo with the crew is insane.
Agree, and aware of all these things. Revolutionary changes, but heavily dependent chassis on American designer.
Still, and most importantly, the Sherman based upon reviewed post war data had a better kill ratio and better crew survival than the T-34. Pretty good for a tank that was designed to be shipped by train, and loaded onto transport ships, to go across the world, to fight. That’s why it wasn’t as wide as the T-34, which just drove from the factory. The Sherman variants were also effective in the South Pacific.
Being smaller the Sherman was better for transport by ship. They could pack more on a transport vessel. All in all the Sherman wasn’t a bad tank. The brains at the Pentagon just didn’t consider that the Germans would build more modern tanks.
Several Generals tried to show the brass their errors before the Sherman was okayed for production, notably George S Patton, but no one paid attention.
They did eventually upgrade the low velocity gun to a high velocity 76 and it was a nimble tank that could go where the heavier Panthers and Tigers couldn’t.
As to the survivability, most of the better German armor was in the east fighting the Russians. There were some of the heavier tanks in the west but the majority weren’t.
Another survivability factor is in how the tanks were used. The Germans liked to use their tanks more like the allies. The Russians liked to use theirs like cavalry. Charge the enemy armor, get in amongst them and have a close up tank to tank donnybrook. Like at Kursk.
The entire concept of blitzkrieg was to use armor to punch a hole, get in the rear and rampage. When taking on armor they preferred to kill from a distance.
As to the Pacific, the Japanese didn’t set the world on fire designing tanks. From the few pictures I’ve seen the Japanese tanks couldn’t have held out against the light Stuart.
That’s some of the best tank information I have read, and thanks for the view on the T-34. The one thing that you have said that struck me is the ease to maintain and repair of the T-34, designed for illiterate peasants to fix. For such a complex object, that is genius design.
Perhaps it is our government psyop is driving a narrative they want out there?
There are none so blind, as those who will not see.
All that is true.
But....... it must actually be no good in actual use. There must be a serious problem or the terminator would have been dragged out when tanks were being killed in droves and the war being lost.
We are about to discover why the Russian commanders were fearful of using it earlier when troops and tanks were being destroyed on a grand scale and a Terminator was sorely needed.
The actual evidence leaves no doubt whatsoever. The reactive armor was and is, worthless
Genius design indeed.
Genius by necessity.
At that point in time Russia had a problem with the vast majority of it’s people being uneducated. The Bolsheviks had sent most of the educated people to the gulag or hung them outright. What was left was the few educated running the country, a small number of semi educated being lower management and the rest as uneducated peasants. A system actually held onto from the Romanov days.
Taking into account the uneducated masses the Russians brilliantly designed a tank that was better than anything the rest of the world had but was simplicity itself. The T-34 was so easy to repair that many major repairs could be done IN THE FIELD. Meanwhile a Panther or Tiger needing major repairs had to be shipped back to Germany they were so over engineered.
The T-34 also had an impact still seen today.
In 1930 a young Mikhail, 17th of 19 children of a peasant family, was deported along with his family as kulaks.
When he reached the equivalent of a 7th grade education his father gave him permission to leave the family. He returned to the town of his birth and found work as a tractor mechanic. He later became a tank mechanic in the Red army and was promoted to tank commander in the 108th tank regiment. In October, 1941 Mikhail was wounded and hospitalized until April, 1942. Listening to his fellow wounded bitch about life and equipment in the Red army Mikhail let his mind work on the problem. What he came up with was the automatic rifle 1947.
Mikhail the tank commander, whose father was a kulak, was Mikhail Kalashnikov inventor of the AK-47. In an interview after the Soviet Union fell Kalashnikov said that he desired to bring the same level of simplicity to his rifle that he had experienced in the T-34.
Crazy world ain’t it.
Crazy.
Reminds me of something my parents used to say:
“Uneducated is different than stupid”
AK-47 and T-34 prove them correct.
I have thought on your post for several hours now and find it very interesting.
I have seen lots and lots of pictures of dead Russian tanks including the vaunted T 90. Many have the turret blown off and I don’t recall any with the reactive armor altered by exploding.
In light of your post it seems that the Russian tankers routinely have open hatches and die absent the protection of the reactive armor.
It is my belief that tanks are being shown to be ineffective in the face of serious anti tank rockets. GPS guided artillery and dead on drones.
I learned VERY early on that calling someone ignorant means/meant they were uneducated. They could be the sharpest tool in the shed but they had never gotten far in school, or may never have attended.
Someone with the greatest education in the world can be the most stupid person who ever lived.
Take the case of David Marshall Williams.
David Williams was a young moonshiner who was known for the strength and purity of his shine. In 1921 the law raided his still and a shootout ensued. A Sheriff’s Deputy was killed. David Williams was sentenced to 30 years for 2nd degree murder.
Spending time in solitary he went over, in his mind, how to make a better rifle. During that time he made a revelation.
https://www.ncmuseumofhistory.org/exhibits/david-marshall-carbine-williams
One of the most friendly guns I have ever had the pleasure of firing, the M1 30 cal. Well designed, rugged, easy to use in dirty conditions. Remember as a child seeing a movie about a prison guy making a rifle, may have been his story.
Read about Nathan Bedford Forrest (not the lies about him being a racist, which he was against), same story.
That probably was the movie about David Marshall Williams. I don’t remember any other.
Regarding Nathan Bedford Forrest, he was an early member of the Klan but quit when they started turning on the former slaves. He ended up being the best friend the negroes around Memphis, TN ever had.
Crazy old world then and now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.