When they tell that Chellenger can stand after hit of Kornet AT. Then I will be interested.
Not so. T-55A, developed as Ob'yekt 155, was introduced to Soviet Ground Forces in 1958, though design is derived from earlier T54 with a differently arranged turret. But even so, some 350 of the Iraqi T55 tanks [and Chinese T59 copies] have been rebuilt with the 2A46 125mm gun and automatic loader of the T-72, as well as a new fire control system and improved transmission, used to replace Iraqi T-72 tanks lost during the 1991 Gulf War, and known as T72Z in Iraqi service- The Iranians have done much the same thing with their SAFIR-74 T-55 variant.
Even better, the KBM1 125mm main gun of T84U can be fitted, with advantages over the autoloader system that's one major weakness of the T-72. And the Ukranian Morozov Tank company has a complete T-55 upgrade package that can include a refit of a 120mm KBM2 main gun utilizing the NATO 120mm ammunition, also with or without autoloader and full gun stabilization and day/night fire control equipment. Originally meant for the planned OPLOT tank for Turkey, the gun package was also considered by the Indians, who still have some 13 operational regiments [700+ tanks, plus some 200 in reserve, 55 per regiment] of tanks equipped with T-55, though upgraded with 105mm L7A1 guns rather than 120mm- These are to be replaced in the next several years with T90S tanks, but interestingly, the Indians feel that replacing their 2000 T-72M1s should take a higher priority.
I have crewed in T55, both L-version as produced by Poland, and modified Israeli captured Egyptian versions reworked with L7A1 105mm main gun and known as TI-67 or Tiran 6 in Israeli service. Though my preference of Soviet tanks is for T-62 model, I'd far rather go to war again in an upgraded T-55 than in any version of T-72, and the real failure of the Iraqis in a 17-tank head-to-head fightoff was in failure to get off the first shots, suggesting poorly tarined crews and poor leadership and tactical use by their commander. A 6 or 7-tank platoon force meeting the British frontally while two other platoons of 5 each worked onto their flanks might have had very different results, IF they carried the 125mm guns and 6M18 APFSDS SABOT ammunition or 3UBK14 *Kombat* gun-launched 125mm missiles, similar to US XM943 STAFF ammunition for 120mm gun of M1A2 Abrams.
As for 9M133 Kornet missile, it's better suited to its mount on BMP-3 armoured personnel carrier than to a tank-versus-tank fight, though in hands of reconnaisance teams supporting tank movements, it should be a real headache for opposing tank force commanders. And I suppose Kornet-E could also be mounted on turret roofs of T-55 instead of old 12,7mm DShk antiaircraft machinegun, giving that old tank warhorse a better capability against enemy main tanks, especially in ambush, like old tank destroyer or Assault Gun *ambush tanks.*
But best employment of obsolescent if not quite yet useless T-55 tanks is to kill armored personnel carriers, self-propelled artillery and supply convoys, and perhaps for airfield and other strongpoint defense. For that role, it's cheap and effective, but taking on Challenger 2e tanks frontally was suicidally stupid.
