Russians are Finally Fixing Their Tanks?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 лис 2022
- Russian tanks have been performing somewhat poorly in this conflict. Whether it is poor decision making, poor tactics or just the lack of training, one thing is certain, a lot of their tanks are riddled with problems. And the most famous example is probably the T-72B3, their most numerous tank, or at least used to be before the war started.
Patreon: / redeffect
The major setback of Russian tank design is kind of hereditary, and that is their reverse speed and internal placement of ammunition. No matter how much other things are improved, this will always be their biggest flaw. Back when T64 and T72 entered service they were so superior protection-wise to all other tanks that this was fairly negligible but on modern battlefield with new infantry AT weapons this is unacceptable. The only way to get rid of this problem is to entirely change their combat platform imo.
Turrets technically exist in design where the Autoloader is in the turret sealed away (obj187)
The platform is alright, and it works. Proof of that is T90m, though, it greatly benefit from that change. Even could potentially keep T72 hulls for in service longer. Which are almost Identical to T90. That's my opinion though.
As for currently they're not awful, they certainly get the job done despite the T72 being old. Tho they should standardize on just the T90m or T14. Only real vehicle losses are the T72's, not the T90's
So the ammunition placement is actually good, since the bottom of the tank is not that open when it’s fighting. The ATs doing their job because the protection on sides and at the back is waaay weaker and it’s all tanks problem.
Just to meanton it they fixed the problem with reverse speed with the T-14 armata and yea they are working on making the ammo storage and trying to make it "saver" even tho I would recomend using an autoloader wich stores its ammunition on the back of the turret.
@@handsomeivan1980 I think that up-armoring the ammo carousel of every tank with auto loader like they did with T90M would be a very smart move that wouldn't require drastic platform changes too.
@@handsomeivan1980 they have hardly deployed t90's that's why hardly any have been lost. the t90 would be so much better if the reverse speed was improved but since it hasnt been improved fortunately for us the t90 is essentially already obsolete.
You know, you really got to admire the sheer amount of research you put into Tank Research especially considering you make it easy to comprehend reasoning behinds actions nations put into their vehicles.
Can't wait for your next video!
He literally just took the info from a Twitter thread lol
@@albertoamoruso7711 And he puts it in a format so everyone can understand, stop malding.
Is it true though? How would you check?
@@VanderlyndenJengold Sure!
The conversation of the truthfulness of military vehicle characters, especially the most recent and modern tanks for example is extremely hard to figure out.
Especially that about all militaries don't just RELEASE information.
But to find as best of our abilities; Is to look at youtubers such as RedEffect; Who actively brings out what things he NOTICES and brings out relevant sources to help us, the viewer make more constructive observations and overall decisions on how we view it.
Great ways to check can include,
1.) Going to a Museum
2.) Talk or read interviews with members who may operate these vehicles (though they may be prevented on what to say regarding abilities of the vehicle)
3.) Read reports of whatever vehicle (For instance, the sheer amount of undertraining, maintenance issues, and staffing issues of the Moskva)
I hope this can help you in your future endeavors as a fellow intake of information around this world!
@@albertoamoruso7711 Yes?
What is the issue of taking information from Twitter?
Here are the differences:
A.) You take information, and immediately believe it is fact.
B.) You take the information, and proceed to gather research behind it; You CONFIRM if it actually did happen or not.
These are the differences of using Information properly and inproperly.
I think the reason for b3 upgrades being half assed was cost, Uralvagonzavod wanted to save any and all money and just barely did the army requirements
Yep, that's entire correct and Red himself actully stated as much.
Corruption Kills
Well, Ural claims they have not received payments to refurbish or repair tanks and apc's sent back from the Frontline so wouldn't be surprised if they just doing cosmetic touch ups to appease the state
I think money issue was on the side of the military. They were thr buyers after all. Other facilities offeder better but more expensive upgrades.
It is important to clarify that it was not UralVagonZavod that decided to save money on modernization, but the Ministry of Defense, which deals with budgets. All modern equipment costs a lot of money: 4-6 million dollars for a tank or apc.
If you look at the Rus Army Expo exhibitions, you will see a large number of the most modern and advanced vehicles: B-10 APC object 693, B-11 object 695, T-15 with Kinzhal turret, K-4386 ZASN-D, VPK-7829 K-17, 2S35, 9K512 Uragan-1M - (Russian HIMARS), etc.
The government simply does not want to and cannot buy them for a variety of reasons, one of which is their price: in order to mass-produce brand-new tanks like the Armata, it is necessary to invest an additional couple of billion dollars in modernizing the production themselves, which will raise their price even higher, and also to build its own production facilities to produce thermal imaging cameras, microchips, etc. In the Russian reality, no one will do such a business, it is too risky. That's why there are endless upgrades to the old and terribly cramped T72s.
And, of course, the corruption in which the production of drones for the army was handled by the company of one of the Defense Ministry's relatives (ua-cam.com/video/U-H9Q1kUjpg/v-deo.html) is just ridiculous.
So when the war began, it turned out that Russia only had drones on paper, some of them handmade.
You can have the best tank in the world, but if you don’t have a well trained tank crew, and the infantry who works closely together with these tanks, you only have a moving steel target on tracks, waiting to be destroyed by an anti tank missile.
Yeah because it's not like russian crews don't have any training...
Because training is apparently something very special that only a few special countries can do...
Yeah because the infantry will surely stop those missiles from hitting and destroying the Tanks... somehow..
The soldiers will throw themselves heroically in front of the missile, interpceiting the missile with their own body, sacrificing themselves to protect the tank... What a Hero
Who needs some stupid APS that was designed for exaclty this purpose anyway.... If you can have soldiers throwing themselves in front of the missile to save the tank...
🙄🤦🏻♀️🤦♂️
@@xAlexTobiasxB You clearly don’t know how tanks operate in the frontline. First you have scouts, than the tanks come in, supported by infantry. If a tank is fired upon by an anti tank missile the infantry is there to surpress that team, and take them out. So the other tanks have a better chance of survival.
And about the training; the last major combined exercise of Russian troops was in 2018. They invaded in 2022. Trust me, that is absolutely not enough practice to work together with other units to carry out a combined attack. And you can see it the videos how Russian tanks are being picked of one by one without any counter action. The Russian airforce is invisible. Russian troops advance without air support. Training costs a lot of money and takes a lot of organisation and equipment that is serviceable. The Russian army is crippled by corruption resulting in a lot of poorly trained and equiped units, because the money dissapeared in a lot of pockets of highly placed officers. That is why no exercises were held in a long time.
Any other questions?
@@bollewillem1 You're missing the point entirely. Everyone knows that tanks need to work with the infantry together, afterall that's the purpose of the tank to support the soldiers.
But the soldiers can not see every single enemy everywhere behind every corner because, unlike your simple-minded fantasy, in reality the enemies are actually hiding behind cover, in bushes, grass, trees and buildings. The soldiers are not superhumans with Xray view, they can not see through objects and obstacles. If it was this easy to see all enemies everywhere rightaway, then ambushes would not be possible, but reality shows that it happens frequently often enough.
And they surely can not see a missile flying 250 m/s (900 km/h) at such high speed you can not even see a small object with your naked eyes.
The missile also doesn't leave a smoking trail behind so it's not revealing its path of origin. All you can see is a tank suddenly blowing up on the field, that's how fast the missiles hit the tank without any warning. You don't even see it coming until it's too late.
Also it's really hilarious how you completely ignore the fact that soldiers and scouts are very vulnerable themselves too, they're getting killed by enemy sniper and MG bullets and artillery shrapnels everywhere. War is not an easy walk, the infantry can not just walk around carelessly like they are on a family Picknick, they will get shot at and killed immediately. You play too much games and watch too many Hollywood Movies. The soldiers are not Rambo or Hulk, they're just vulenrable boys getting holed by bullets and shrapnels everywhere. Unlike your Rainbow Fantasy world, the real war is harsh, brutal and bloody environment. Everyone's fighting for their own life in that situation. Most soldiers don't make it out alive...
So no, infantry or scouts can not protect the tanks from getting hit by missiles, most of the soldiers can not even protect themselves to stay alive in the first place. Infantry can not stop the enemy from shooting a missile at the tank, just as they can not stop bullets and artillery fired at them. This is war, not a video game.
The only thing that can effectively stop missiles from hitting the tank, is Active Protection System because it was actually created for exactly this purpose. This is why it's so important to upgrade tanks with such a system so they are protected against missiles and they have a better chance to stay alive on the battlefield.
Russian tanks are being massacred because they don't have APS, that's why they are vulnerable to modern top-attack missiles and drones. But this is not only a problem for Russian tanks exclusively, literally any other tank in the world that doesn't have APS would have the same problem of course. This is why APS is so important for tank in the modern warfare, without such system is the tank pretty much useless.
Only a very few countries in the world actually have APS for their tanks right now, such as the Israeli Merkava 4 (upgraded since 2011) and now the American Abrams, the German Leopard 2 and the British Challenger 3 are also getting upgraded with this system now as well. This is the only effective solution to protect tanks from missile attacks.
If Russian tanks had such APS too, they would also have a better chance to survive on the battlefield and keep on fighting. But they don't have it, so they're getting massacred.
This has nothing to do with bad training, because training can not physically stop a missile from hitting and destroying a tank. But APS can do exactly that because it was made for this purpose. So it's the lack of proper equipment that is actually the problem, not the lack of training or doctrine.
Besides, exercise is not the same as basic training. These are two totally different things. Training is what every single soldier has to go through at the beginning of his carreer for a few years when joining the army.
So all soldiers and tank crews are required to have basic training, so they know how to operate their tank as they are supposed to do in combat.
@S you forgot Challenger 3, Merkava 4, K2 Black Panther, T-90M, ZTZ-99, Altay, Leclerc and BM-Oplot, they are also in the list of best tanks in the world
@@user-ek3vq5ib3z t 14 is not even operational.
I'm just gonna say it. I don't think all these changes will really change much about how they fare on the battlefield at all.
Reactive armor (if used and placed correctly) could possibly protect against a javelin or NLAW
Probably not, Russian tanks have been fared pretty well considering the massive amount if ATGM, artillery rounds and RPG Ukraine was provided with.
And now that 2/3 of NATO members can't send any more aid to Ukraine as the NYT claimed, Russian tanks will increasingly fare better in future no matter if provided with a few upgrades or not.
@@pierceplaysstudios245 they're made to go straight through era like butter with tandem warheads...
@@albertoamoruso7711 I haven't seen such an article. On the contrary, the aid to ukraine consists only 5% of NATOs equipment.
Edit: I have found the article - guess who makes up the 20 members who can't give more... the already small or underequipped nations like the baltics, denmark, Sweden, Norway Romania, Bulgaria, Greece etc. The 10 members who can give more are the main suppliers of arms to NATO - France, Germany, Italy, US, UK, Belgium, the Netherlands, Turkey, Canada and probably Poland. These have been the nations giving Ukraine the most weapons throughout. Btw, this has featured on RT and Sputnik, not NYT until 2 hours ago. Sus.
@@wh34t_ I also just looked it up and to answer if reactive armor can stop a javelin......kinda
The abysmal reverse speed I think is the biggest issue, not the carousel autoloader. If the tank crew feels hopeless in the face of a threat they might just abandon the tank altogether before even being hit
I dont mind the theorizing about possible solutions.. but I hope there is none and you are correct :D Seems unlikely that they will be able to change that.
Indeed. There is a video of a Russian tank that had to turn around in the middle of an open field to retreat, then got hit in the back by a rocket and blew up. All because its reverse was garbage. If it didn't turn around and took the hit on the front armour, it would have had a better chance :/
I’d argue it’s the auto loader+ammunition storage. A tank shouldn’t immediately kill its crew and launch its turret 50+ ft into the air when shot
@@lb7901 I mean.. most people are glad about problems with Russian armour.
If I was russia Id use tanks in engagement groups of 10-14 at a time, instead of 2-4. thats what they were designed for. Cant get hit if 10 tanks cover the same area
It seems crazy Russia has put 200 newly upgraded t-72s on a train and sent to the front this month and then they also had 100T-90Ms. That’s almost 20% of the prewar stocks which is amazing they could put that many out this year. I doubt they can keep up with that speed but it’s kinda impressive. The upgrades are for thermals and some systems updating so the updated tanks are still good tanks even if they are older
the soviet union had 50.000 tanks when it collapsed, not hard to refit and make the mothballed ones usable again if they were stored properly, like only 2000 surviving T-72s from the collapse of the soviet union would just utterly change the entire dynamic
Am I the only one who thinks closing the gaps between the ERA on the turret would look very satisfying?
What you mean like a solid sheet of ERA? Cause that would be hard to replace and make it only good for 1 round.
@@abyssinia4ever nah nah like, the ERA that's already on the turret, just make it fit together so there's no spaces in-between the panels.
@@abyssinia4ever And one solid sheet of ERA is the only way to make it equaly effective. If you gonna hit the edge of the ERA brick then there is little to no chance that this ERA brick will be able to change anything.
And people commenting here pretending that if there is no gab betwen them then there is no problem... LoL
I mean, the biggest tank killer in this war is arty, nothing can solve this issue. Stuhna can penetrate upper front plate why aim elsewhere, Top attack mode wont be effected. So the question stands what was the reason behind this changes? They needed to come to it somehow, shoulder fired launchers protection maybe?
Perhaps it helps protect against the drone-dropped munitions.
Could be just an evolution of the cope cages, too.
@@Ludovit110 An ERA on mud shields won`t protect from dnone-dropped munitions, a tank APFSDS also won`t be affected much, only older ATGMs will be effected, so imo I don`t see any use for this "upgrades" other then money laundering
@@bohdannikitin9119 kontakt-5 provides around 20% decrease in APFSDS performance so it's helpful against old ukranian 3BM22.
@@BrezhnevStan in 1 shot out of 100, maybe, we haven`t seen much tank on tank combat anyway, besides Ukr had a sizable stockpile of 3bm42 prior to the war and Poles & Slovak have some interesting rounds in production, | bet in some quantities they`ve donated to Ukraine
@@bohdannikitin9119 I mean there have been tests if you dont believe about kontakt-5, but also ukranian tanks have mostly been using older 3BM22 or 15 the 42 is their exclusive top of the line shell atm, like the 3BM46 or 60 for russia
That was a awesome video full of knowledge. Thanks for all the time you put into it.
They have the super tank Armata. It is so OP that they simply leave it out of battlefield because they do not want to win too soon
😂😂😂
@@rudeowner but it will still beat NATO ✊
@@piked261 Then why they are not showing their true power to beat NATO ? I’m asking question. Why ?
@@piked261 They cant beat farmers towing their tanks, and you expect them to beat an actual army? They performing poorly on Ukraine, to the point that they already left key cities like Kherson, wich opens a way for ukraine to bomb the shit out of the Russia military base on Crimea. Im pretty sure they could win with NATO... If NATO cut 95% of its budget, personel, weaponary.
They have shit right now.
Russia's problem is simple. There are lots of great things in inventory on their book but none really exists in the warehouse when you actually go there to use them.
Accurate as fuck.
The data about 8000 tanks was from the 90’s Lmao.
@@RobertLutece909 I wouldn’t expect the Russian High Command to understand that this is not World War II we’re the Soviets we’re able to drive unfinished tanks off the production lines and send them into the fray
@@PeterMuskrat6968 and also even if they had 8gazilions tanks, they arent storaged in nato standarts
@@eneskesicioglu3907 You are clown
Ukraine got unreal amounts of anti-armor weapons, tens of thousands and again with all the huge help of dozens of NATO countries and you will be defeated like Hitler
@@milosjovicevic6083 mr russian, i have never understood this hitler anology, hitler attacked its neighbour country and started ww2, i dont understand hows ukraine hitler and you guys allies while you guys started this war over your leaders fear and now you say that you guys are good while they are the nazis somehow
Medvedev's long black leather jacket: Now where have I seen jackets like that before?
Even if they improve their tanks, this won’t change the fact they’re still using old soviet models. You can only improve an old design so much before you can’t make it any better.
There's 2 drawback to the t90m and it's the revers and the fact they still have the caracel
What about the Abram?
No major armies of today have their whole tank fleets modernized Russia is no exception
Soviets made some good tanks, but yeah they rlly do need a modernized design. Only America and China have the will to create new model and the economy to mass produce it
Yes, it would,because that would make them new models.
What's more, there's countless examples on those models still having tons of usefullness left.
The PT-91, T-72M4CZ, M-84AS1 have all solved the major issues with the T-72 platform.
And Ukraine solved most of the problems with the T-80(T-84 Oplot).
Very informative. Thank you.
Additional ERA coverage may in theory reduce casualty rates on their tanks, but Ukraine is steadily increasing its use of tandem charge anti tank weapons, so it might be an insignificant upgrade.
I'd also see it like that. Plus it makes the vehicle heavier and slower, especially on muddy undergrounds. I hope UA will have a steady supply of everything to take these tanks out asap.
True for the B3 which uses kontakt 5 but the BVM with relikt does affect tandem heat warheads
If they switch there kontakt 5 to relikt it could fix the problem
@@mbtenjoyer9487 Maybe, but they seem to be opting for the cheaper option here at the expense of crew safety as it would seem.
@@mycure0498 cheap option, at expense of not being expensive and time consuming to make
if they want something to really improve crew survivability they would either add ammo storage outside the turret or even go fully into NATO style Autoloader tank, like Leclerc.
as you said ERA would not really affect the tank that much
Those may seem like some very significant changes that would improve survivability and or reliability but I believe if the crew isn't properly trained it won't matter how good the tank is.
Yes. Logistics, crew training, motivation, and command/control/communication/coordination will remain the major issues.
These are neat little fixes, but only changing small things of situational relevance. None of it will fix how Russia is using tanks in the wrong situations in the wrong way.
@@T33K3SS3LCH3N Lmao you have that PFP yet you are more aware and are better experienced than top star Russian Generals.
And yes you are correct
Tanks are not meant to be used alone but in combination with infantry and airforce. By themself they are easy targets for drones, Javelin and NLAW.
@@dindrmindr626 the kremlin would like to hire you
@@dindrmindr626 Other elements are there to provide support in the form of covering fire on ATGM infantry, using anti-drone weapons or by being forward deployed in a covered or concealed position to give information on possible threats to the tanks.
CORRECT. They screwed up in Georgia as well. The place was LITTERED with dead Russian crap.
@@RobertLutece909 infantry are vulenrable too. They get killed by sniper, MG, bullets, artillery shrapnels, mortar, mines etc.
Also the infantry is not a guarantee to see EVERY SINGLE ENEMY hiding behind cover, unless they have some godlike super-human capabilities...
Yeah sure, why don't the infantry simply "dodge" every bullet fired at them just like in Matrix Movie and win the war... stupid... reality is not a Hollywood Movie.
It's not the freaking job of the infantry to "protect" the tank. If that's the case, then the tank is only a burden on the infantry and not a help...
but the purpose of a tank is not to put a burden on the infantry, it's actually supposed to RELIEVE the infantry by giving fire support to them...
The infantry is already busy enough dealing with the enemy on their own, they can not be "babysitters" for the tanks...
if the tank can not defend itself against missiles withs its own denfesive measures then it's pretty much useless.
This is what _Active Protection System_ (APS) is there for. This system is supposed to actually protect the tank against missiles, by literally destroying the missile before it hits the tank.
That is how you effectively solve the problem. Infantry support can not always stop every enemy missile from being fired, just like they can not dodge every bullet fired at them.
@@RobertLutece909 Nonsense. It was never the infantry's job to "protect the tanK", where did you even get this nosnnese from? It really shows that you know absolutely nothing about military, warfare or tactics whatsoever.
The tank has always been used to support the infantry and thereby relieving the burden of the infantry, not to actually increasing the burden by needing to be "babysitted".
the infantry can not always deny the enemy from shooting at them. Besides the infantry is just as vulnerable too, they get killed by sniper, MG and artillery. At some point the enemy will get a chance to shoot at you in a war, whether you like it or not. If it was that easy to simply "prevent" the enemy from shooting at you, then ambushes would be impossible. In fact there would never be any casualties in wars ever, because "everyone would simply "deny" the enemy from shooting at them lol. Do you realize now how stupid your comment is? You are delusional af.
Just look at some videos here on youtube.
There are dozens of videos where you can see Russian infantry and tanks working together and yet the tanks still get destroyed by missile plus the accompanying infantry get killed too on top of that. So what is your stupid point? Infantry is not a guerantee that the tank will never be attacked. You can keep deluding yourself all you want if it helps you sleep at night, but it won't change reality.
Furthermore you are completely ignoring the killer-drones such as the Switchblade which flies high above in the sky, the infantry won't even see them until it's too late.
The only effective solution is APS to defend tanks from missiles. That's why the biggest leading militaries in the world (USA, Israel, UK, Germany) started upgrading their tanks with such system, because unlike you (and Putin), they are actually smart and understood how to do their job
Besides, the Abrams never faced the same weaponry in Iraq that the Russian army is facing in Ukraine right now, let alone the Iraqi forces were nowhere close to what capabilities the Ukrain Forces have today. Even your beloved Arbumz would get massacred the same way if it was attacked by Javelins & drones (except for the newest Abrams version that is getting upgraded with APS for this exact reason).
the outro is one of the most beautiful things i've ever heard
makes me feel nostalgic although i've only ever heard it on this channel
I think it's like you said it, they need countermeasures like smoke and warning systems that help them know of the incoming missile.
No amount of stuff can fix issues with the use of these tanks. The biggest killer of these tanks is how poorly they have been used. Which has improved over time, even according to the Ukrainians.
I am actually surprised at how well they’ve held up considering the sheer volume of top of the like anti tank systems. With roughly half their losses being abandonment or being stuck in the mud. I don’t think these changes will make a massive difference.
I was assembling the Meng scale model T-72B3M and while looking at reference pictures I was surprised that yeah the SOSNA-U cover you have to remove the 4 bolts to do it. I did see 1 picture where they look like they installed a fabric cover that you could quickly flip up and down to cover it, but it's strange that they were like yeah no not needed. Espessially in photos where you see the amount of dirt that can accumulate on the sight.
Interesting. Great video.
Cheers. Another good video.
0:58 - did anyone else found it to be shocking throwback to SS visiting their factories in leather coats! DM looks exactly like Albert Speere
Maybe the things on the turret are more official cope cage mounting points?
I'm not sure about that mud guard solution. Whenever I see them near a hot zone, they're either flipped upwards or torn off completely.
Nice video!
I was a Marine anti tank assualtman. Never have I heard some one as knowledgeable about Russian tanks before.
Do a video explaining just how skilled an occupation anti tank is, because people seem to think NLAW is some magic wunderweapon.
i doubt you are a tank "assualtman"
A salt man
Any other western tanks would perform similarly, let’s admit u.s tanks fought ppl wearing sandals and armed with rpg, ukranian war on other hand is modern warfare with all air/satellite recon and most advanced AT systems, it’s actually an acceptable loses in such wars
Most people still don’t get that
Hell yeah awesome video
Love your video
If you speak Russian, you might be interested in the channel Shawshank Redemption here on UA-cam. There are "reviews" of several tanks, including T-72B3, specifically a model of 2016, but also T-64 (which he has the most experience with), T-90 and T80, he also mentioned having been in "Abrams". I guess the main issue with T-72B3 is how cramped the gunner's station is, as the "Sosna-U" sight is not a small thing, and it's placement to the left side sucks, but they also left the previous gunsight in place as a back-up, yet it's not a small back-up telescopic sight, it's a pretty hefty box, not just T-90 but even other versions of T-72 are more spacious. It seems the one and only upside to T-72 compared to T--64 is thicker side armour on turret "cheeks".
Yes, T-72 main problem is there is no space for the crew - there is not much that can be done about that --- this is why upgrading this tank is mostly a stop gap measure.
T-64 shoots much shorter arrow, with much less penetration.
@@mattilatvala4164 they have the same gun
Interesting. What’s Shawshanks views on the T-64 variants used by Ukraine. Like it’s pros and cons? And which tank do the Ukrainians like the most?
@@HurrDurr29999 Definite pro points are smoother ride and supposed better resistance of tracks against being fouled by large amounts of dirth - T-72 mightt throw tracks off in situation like that, while T-64 will not. A contra point is construction of wheels on T-64, making driving on hard pavement roads less comfortable due to vibration (at least in a certain speed range) and demanding lubrication every few hundred of kilometres, otherwise they might overheat and even catch fire.
Maybe those little stubs are for communication so they can actually talk and coordinate with other forces like their air force or infantry.
Russians?
Are you expecting the Russians to *Co-ordinate*?
@@PeterMuskrat6968 They did a great job with it in ww2
@@PeterMuskrat6968 I'm on the front lol we got radios
@@rayzas4885 That was the USSR, not Russia.
Russia has always been incompetent, the rest of the SSR countries carried Russia.
@@CombatArchive_1 So, you’re command give you detailed instructions on how to advance, where to advance, what you do when you get to the location you are supposed to be and what types of resistance will be be facing?
I highly doubt that.
Great. I want those ERA blocks on the gun mantlet in Warthunder as well ^^
2:40 To be fair that was mid point of tank, about halfway down track. Not the front of the track
Everyone: please just run out of tanks
Russia: NO
Throwing thousands of tanks and tens of thousands of young boys into the meat grinder is the prime definition of GIGA CHAD am I right?
okay... well... keep on doing it then, and keep on losing. lmfao! *facepalm*.
It's the fact the west says Russia can't make tanks anymore or the fact they say they don't have anymore tanks that's false Russia has a lot of t72s and t80s in storage they don't have to be insanely upgraded because Ukrainian tanks are basically not a threat since they're significantly worse than Russian ones (Ukrainian tanks are usually around the 70s or 60s)
@@matthewchapman6305 yes, worked during ze great patriotic war will work again! :trollface:
@@lowlevel9448 Obviously there are exaggerations, but WORSE? Not really. In fact, you’re missing a key point here. Ukraine is also getting more tanks. Better ones. Like the British Challenger.
T90M is such a good tank
Yes,but is it really better than Leopard 2A7V or M1A2 SEP V3?I don’t think so..
All brand new B3's coming out of the factory will probably come in this standard now but I doubt they will retrofit all B3's currently in service with this upgrade.
If you can, take a look at the Object 640 Black eagle prototype. I believe it would have been comparable, or even better than T-84-120 Ятаган. Maybe not as survivable since it not only had a rear turret bussel autoloader, but also retained an ammunition caracel i believe. I could be wrong though.
3:52 maybe they are for installing those cope cages. After all many russian tanks have cope cages over them. Maybe they provide some protection from top-down attacks of NLAW or the javelin.
Javelin? Not a chance.
Random shaped charge.
It’s also such a big missile that it would probably just go through the bars just by it’s mass alone.
What I don't understand is why they didn't put the ERA tiles on the t-72b3 front turret the way they did it on the t-80bvm.I don't understand why there are so many wide gaps on it The belarussian upgraded t-72b3m was way better.
t-72b3 and t-80bvm are made by different plants.
Different ERA panels B3 has Kontact 5 the BVM has Relikt
There Is still a Little weak point in the front, the lower plate should be Easy to Pen, but hard to hit, and with a APFSDS there should be a possibility of hitting the Ammos
On a side note, Medvedev cosplaying as a Gestapo officer is pure irony
Given the apparent increase in ERA coverage, a bigger question is, how effective has ERA been in Ukraine, especially against the more modern ATGMs in use, that are designed to defeat it?
It was not effective so they need to make the impresion that they changing/fixing something when in reality the whole idea is questionable at best.
And there is no chance to make it equaly effective, even if bricks are closeto each other if you gonna hit the edge of the brick then you can forget about significant reduction of the projectile/HEAT penetrating power.
Hmm. Let's put that question in some other way. Now image if you lived in medieval times. All you had was a helmet. A good one, real thick. What happens next is that your opponents do notice your helmet and target other parts on your body. Wounds everywhere, but not a single blow to the head. Did the helmet work? I'd say it did its job. But it needed more stuff that would do its job too just to keep you safe. Same for ERA and coverage.
There still using kontak-5 era which doesn’t do much against modern ATGM
Relikt era could possibly counter modern atgm
@@Bialy_1 Actually it is effective. Numerous times ERA has withstood hits from NLAW, Javelin and other ATGMs. I've seen videos of tanks having to be hit multiple times with ATGM's to kill/disable them, and often the crew would still survive.
@@InvaderNatDT I doubt that any tank has ever survived a Javelin missile. Maybe RPG's only but surely not Javelin missiles.
Thank you for the great work and partial analysis that you are doing far from any propaganda from any side of the war
Aymen Slaimi.
@@asdsdjfasdjxajiosdqw8791 yess ?!?!
The only good think about the T-72b3 runs on vodka...Oh wait thats the crew
"Somewhat poorly" I had to laugh. You are the master of understatement.
Good info.
Happy to see, that its too little and too late, and making manufacturing take longer and be more expensive.
Money and manpower is just a number in a dictatorship running on conscripts.
The fact they are increasing feeding the war machine is a serious red flag
You hope. In the meantime Ukraine is a wreck and Europe is in debt forever in a middle of an economic crisis. Its good that you are happy...
@@S300V you have clearly gone deep in the Vodka.
In the west we are doing just fine.
Lots of energy and heat and economy is fine.
@@iberiksoderblom Until you start paying for your gold priced LNG. With friends like the US who needs enemies. Btw I see you long for the real vodka... All that fake scandinavian stuff, right? XD
@@S300V Gas is not exactly expensive.
It was expensive for a short periode, but not anymore.
The major setback to Russian tank design is that they've been used in a peer vs peer war and no other tanks have.
thats not a setback? thats good
in ways
Any tank without APS hardkill fared poorly over the last two decades against massed ATGMs including Merkava and Leopard2. People blame training, tactics etc but none of those help without updated protection systems against new weapons.
It’s like crossbow and then arquebus vs armor, gotta meet the threat with the adapted new solution. Russia slept through Syria apparently. They should have invested in APS. Now they are relearning the hard way.
correct. 100% ...
@@sapphyrus Good explanation, but the expense isn't worth the outcome. At least not on the economical chassis that is the T72. Russia invaded with 170,000ish professional troops against 300,000ish ukrainian professionals. Those conditions are just ridiculously bad for tanks. Especially when the ukrainians have/had so many javelins and tanks. I still can't get my head around why they would put their tankers in such an insane situation.
Let's see if every Abrams and L2 gets modern APS systems. I personally doubt it.
Now.. the major manpower changes taking place should reaaaally offset their tank losses. I suppose we will see.
I think Russia learned one valuable lesson in Syria. That being that even late variant leopards can be taken out easily without proper infantry support. In addition Merkevas can be overwhelmed with simple rockets. Expensive tanks just aren't worth it. Never were.
@@lanceb7288 As of Rn it’s just the Abrams tanks that are sent to theatre that get the trophy APS reason being is the cost. Publicly known only 400 Abrams tanks have APS. And Germany has already shown that all Leopard 2A7’s have it as standard equipment. The 2A6’s will get them when they’re upgraded to 2A7 standard.
TLDR: it’s already done with L2 and US only has 10% of Abrams equipped with APS
Could i ask why does t72b3 dont have the ERA missing on the right upper side when the cannon looks right on you (2:54 for example on the right)
Because a full kontakt 5 block would interfer with the sight
Some here have mentioned the cramped conditions compared to western tanks, and that needs to be looked at from another angle. The Russian MBTs were designed to be less observable than their western counterparts, but that was before thermal and IR became common. So they sacrificed interior space for reduced silouhette, but with modern optics and sensors, it's become largely irrelevant. While they still present a smaller target to shoot at, that really only matters at extreme ranges. So what was once a reaosnable tradeoff now yields little benefit, with all of the deficits of the cramped spaces.
Amazing to see how this Australian invention has morphed over the years
That factory floor was probably highly prepped for the photo ops. They will probably upgrade those on a very small scale
Typical westerner claim: probably
@@S300V I’m not the one that sent tanks with empty era blocks into Ukraine after spending billions.
@@S300V russia lies ALL THE TIME, we have to be skeptical when russia shows or posits anything.
@@rsKayiira And you seen that where? CNN? While all Russian news is banned! And CNN or whoever got it from where? AFU propaganda team? Come on.
@@paddington1670 Than be skeptical on Ukrainian and Western lies too! The first thing that dies in war is truth!
Hi Red Effect.T90M and T90MS. What's the difference?
I think the major problem is there's no way of knowing if there is actually era in those containers or that the steel is the right kind or a hundred other cost saving measures and grifts
That extra ERA probably won't help much against tandem shaped Javelin, but NLAW is single shaped so, those will have a much harder time going through the armor now I would assume.
It probably will twice casualties but I see a lot of artillery kills. I feel like a change of tank use would be better
@@bruhmomento4590 agreed. This upgrade is gonna help Russia but how much stands to be seen, I have doubts that it alone will have a major impact
@@bruhmomento4590 While a better reverse speed and more engine power does help, it's the crew training that makes the difference and russia has lost a lot of experienced crews.
Actually in terms of artillery the T tanks have a smaller top profile than western tanks. So again, a new type of tank won't help much.
NLAW is a tandem charge.
@@mattz1230 No it's not, to quote Saab's own Website, "The unjammable and man-portable system can be deployed in around five seconds by a single soldier, day or night. With a combat range of 20-800 m and a single shape charge, NLAW is the best anti-tank weapon for infantries and dismounted troops in complex terrain."
Already replied to it and added a link but I think it was auto deleted because of the link, but you can look up the website yourself
The small stubs sticking out of the top are altimeters, so they can measure just how high the turret goes into the air when all the extra crap bolted onto the side of the tank does nothing.
You are one angry man. Did a Russian steal your girl?
@@someturkishguy8638 leave him be man, the russian rest rent-free in his brain... even if he has one
@@akid1263 fair argument. Good night friend
Those ERA modules are filled with rubber inserts. The contractors pocketed the money and provided cope armour.
Those tiny little dome things you were pointing out at 3:50, those look like they could be laser warning receivers? There's two either side of the gun...
I think they are LWRs too. Not 100% sure tho/
Isn't one of the biggest weaknesses of Russian tanks the fact they operate so many models and variants? They are trash, logistically, and this just makes it more difficult
Not really. These are essentially the same tanks with minor changes. So most parts fit all. And units often use the same tanks. So they get the parts they need.
That wouldnt have been a problem in the 70s and 80s but since russia hasnt had any real money since 1992 it is
@@ares8866 not anymore...
@@remogatron1010 What not anymore.
most of these changes are just adding stuff to the t72b3, the only actual change would be the sight cover(which as said by red they are already putting it on t90m and t80bvm too), the rest is just russia adding ERA to some places.
Hard kill APS ( that can counter top attack munition ) is what they need
Yea but they're pretty expensive and not worth it just for t72b3s and t80bvms they save the arena ms for the t90ms
@@lowlevel9448good point
@@mbtenjoyer9487 yea Iv seen quite a lot of ppl in this comment section thinking Ukrainian tanks are superior to Russian tanks and that uk will send challengers to Ukraine lmao
@@lowlevel9448 “not worth it for the t72’s” because 3 human lives aint worth shit either ofcourse.
@@Jonnesdeknost well in terms of aps they're expensive and not every nation can afford to put them on every tank they have (just like the us don't put trophy on every Abrams)
They really need to look into changing or upgrading the transmissions in the T72 line
Probably not easily done - there is only limited space in engine bay.
On the CV90 the sight protection is just hinged to a handle over the gunner.
Completley mechanical linkage
Same on the m48/m60 tanks.
"world of tanks is so unrealistic, real tank warfare would involve intricate co-ordination with infantry and other arms"
real life tank warfare: 2:27
Underated comment.
0:55 Medvedev, seen here in his finest Gestapo-Coseplay outfit..
Yes, very fitting.
Those sensors can be laser warning receivers.
I recently saw a video of a column of Russian T-80 tanks driving down a road in winter camo.
I don’t know about it’s other upgrades but it certainly looked like a preparation for a winter offensive. If you can find the video it could turn into a good video for you.
I think it’s an old video from the start of the war tho I’m not sure
@@Niko-uu6ng Yeah it was confirmed to be an older video.
Good, I welcome the burnt out husks of Russian tanks and the filthy dogs inside turned to ash.
Half the Russian casualties are going to be from frostbite alone.
Its old video from beginning of the war, all this t80 were destroyed.
@@arturscherbakov2543 you telling me they used winter camo during fall?
All of these should have been done BEFORE the "operation" and losing over 1500 tanks. But hey, it "worked" against poorly armed Chechens, right? after losing to them in the first war. The fact that 2nd best army in the world didn't have attack UAV's and barely any reconnaissance drones speaks for itself.
No they had Orlan-10 drones!
(That was made of the cheapest parts imaginable)
They had around 3000 recon drones.
@@PeterMuskrat6968 Orlans are TRASH!
@@Disconnect350 that was my point
Hey redeffect you should cover the poles buying the K2 and making their own variant k2pl and the various different equipment we are buying from the Koreans
None of the tanks have even been made. That is still a far away thing.
Not sure additional or improved ERA placement is going to make much of a difference. Ukraine doesn't have very good tanks. Most Russia tank kills have been from precision artillery namely M982 Excalibur and M31A1 GMLRS Unitary or from ATGMs.
Have they used many GLRMS on tanks? I thought those are mostly used for long distance logistics kills. They have tube arty spread out much more, fire missions for GLMRS are on fixed point targets, or when it's a very safe bet on SPAAGs, Smerch etc.
@@Walterwaltraud Well a recently destroyed Russian convoy was supposedly attacked by HIMARS and it included a few Russian tanks, so take that as you will.
@@mycure0498 True, thanks, forgot about that one. Though parked and longer of course makes for a juicy target. The drones that could guide the precise strike usually don't go that far, or tanks would be far beyond the frontline, but yeah, great example.
It certainly will help with ATGMs which what most of added ERA is for.
Most of Ukrainian tanks were also destroyed with artillery - precision strikes with Krasnopol ammo.
@Tom K Most the the good ATGMs are designed to defeat ERA (Javelin, Brimstone 2, Stugna-P, etc) through use of a tandem charger. Even older stuff like TOW-2B while not a tandem charge is a large EFP designed to remain intact long enough to pierce the relatively thin roof.
Against some older arguably now obsolete "anti-tank" weapons sure but Ukrainians seem to be using the best-in-class stuff against the Russia tanks saving the older stuff for IFVs/APCs/SPGs/etc.
Also this isn't going from no-ERA to ERA but rather a pretty small tweak of ERA. We will have to wait and see but I seriously doubt the reduction in tank losses will even be noticeable.
Fixing weaknesses in their armor is a positive step but I don't think it will do much to improve survivability if their experienced crews have already been killed off?
this isn't going to make a blind bit of a difference honestly.
@@MrJC1 ok "expert" im Sure you are the smartest "person" around
@@MrJC1 it's a step in the right direction
@@barbarapitenthusiast7103 watch and see. lmfao! their ERA cells are crap. it doesn't matter how many you stuff on there. geeesh.
@@johnpaul3099 it is low hanging fruit. bottom of the barrel upgrades. it will serve no useful purpose only to buck up the lads who are gonna get baked, for a brief time.
Medgiev is looking sharp in his shinny black Indiana Jones Gestapo black trench coat..
Are those new tanks being build or are those old tanks being upgraded?
I just do not think this is significant. If ukrainians were taking these out by hitting that weak spot... then they are crack shots lmao. the fact is, the tank is just poor, and so are their tactics. i just cannot see this changing tbh with you.
I should think upgrades are done when tanks go in for repair or major services so they aren't pulled off the frontline for no good reason otherwise.
doubt unless its damaged stuff, they probably doing that in tanks they get from storage
Seems like a thing.
@@RobertLutece909 not really if they are getting those as new tanks you will see them with the mobilized troops they don't seen to have received yet.
@@RobertLutece909 well then those are all rumors since drafted troops cant leave Russia... And its not like lack of Training= dead soldier, look at how many territorials that got a A4 paper manual on the AK are still alive.
I doubt the 1st Tank army stuff btw they said that because of the northem offensive which saw no oposition (and why it was low casualities for Ukraine) yet the Russians managed to conentrate a bunch of tanks there to lose their force as a conbat unit? (Yes that is what a bunch of news journals said)
@@RobertLutece909 Some Territorials, like Azov, and some other far right groups, I agree, not Territorial that was raised yesterday and is under 1 day training.
I doubt the Russians will send Conscripts to Ukraine tho, mostly is a question of Morale, basically "I didn't signed up for this" but instead its "I didn't got made fight for this"
Well Moralle only trully gets affected when you do stuff like get into artilhery bombardment every second, remember that Russians barerly have acess to phones.
No cope bucket pre installed on the turret.
I wonder why they never fixed the reverse speed on their tanks. It should be really easy and not take much space to have an inverter, so that whatever number of gears you have for forward speed can also be used backwards. Naturally, it doesn't make sense to drive full speed backwards, but it's up to the driver to decide how fast he drives...
Money they always go cheap as possible when upgrading ( they also have a corruption problem )
Can you do a vid about the t80 bvm ?
he did one
ua-cam.com/video/D6uBD_BUxAo/v-deo.html
@@donttknowhyy چه جالب
I’m sad for all this poor tanks…..
Please stop this useless war,save life….
well in that case, get russia to stop blowing up civilians, and to retreat from all of ukraines territory or... if anything this war will escalate given time.
The war will end when Russia surrenders.
The poor tank designs have lasted so long because they have only had to ever really deal with RPG fire
Could the pieces sticking out of the turret be a laser warning system?
It would be interesting if Gaijin added those additional armor upgrade to the existing UBH armor package upgrade in game. Cz T-72B3's ERA placements is not that tidy looking imo so at least it helps to make the tank look better lmao
Maybe a second armour module
Russian top tier does not need a thing added.
@@SSGSteelTigers Well you are correct but we are talking about Gaijin here
Nah i think a second armor module would too grindy for a smol chunk of accessories
@@Stepan_M we will never know
Modern AT missiles still have a high chance of defeating Russian ERA and penatrating the turret and upper hull.
And of course, there is the ever-present problem of the lower hull armor being defeated by basically everything except a grenade.
well, yes since those tanks are using older armor tech, Russian top ERA can deal with newer ATGMs, and Future ATGMs will deal with that.
The problem with Russia is they can't upgrade their massive army that they need to defend their massive homeland.
@@gerfand no it cannot. lmfao! Russian stuff is trash. smh. that is why they are getting pasted.
@@MrJC1 then why they didn't lost he war already?
@@gerfand they HAVE lost the war. they are just on borrowed time.
The upper hull on the Russian tanks is actually much stronger than the upper hull on western tanks. The turret will easily withstand hits from "modern AT missiles" in areas where it is designed to do so - that means from the front, where the composite armor is. The top armor is 40-50mm thick. Nobody sane has any illusions about that being able to defeat Javelins, but western tanks have even thinner turret tops. Russia would need to rearrange everything on top of their turrets, such as optics, periscopes, machine gun mounts and develop new hatches with new hinges in order to fix in order to accommodate thick dual layered ERA that's necessary to make a difference. That will of course not happen.
They don't need to "fix" their tanks, they need to use them properly!
please can you tell me what song plays in background of your vids?
Every military industrial complex improves itself through long sustained warfare, especially during a peer against peer war, like this one Russia against nato. These won't be the last changes and upgrades made to these tanks. It's important to notice that until now there was no mass production in the russian military industrial complex, they only produced samples and now they're gonna change that. For example China has only samples of hypersonic missiles but not mass production of it. The gosplan is gonna be introduced again in the russian military industry and this will allow a constant upgrade according to strategic planning and not profits from contracts.
My brother in Christ they are fighting the Disco age leftovers
Just recently Zelensky told a joke.
2 Jews meet in Odessa. One tells the other "So Russia and NATO are at war here in Ukraine"
"Tell me how the war is going"
"Well the Russians have lost thousands of tanks, tens of thousands of men, they are running out of ammo"
"Wow and what about NATO?"
"NATO? They havent arrived yet".
Or something like that. I am paraphrasing.
there is no fixing the poor quality, poor design, poor training and general corruption
yooooo medvedev be dripping in that leather overcoat.
Maybe they should tether the turret to the tank body. Like they do with racing car wheels. It would make it easier to collect the pieces. No improvements to stop NLAW or Javelin.
no improvements because NLAW is not even top 10 and javelin isnt even top 3 anti tank weapons in ukraine
@@AlenB29 Dudes were literally welding buckets to the turret with candles because someone said it would throw off the javelins. Let's not talk about the cope cages.
@@Bitchslapper316 Belorussian tanks first of all and yea no shit they don't stop top attack munitions then again only aps can effectively stop nlaws
@@Bitchslapper316 US Armored Vehicles had “cope” cages on them too. They are for less potent anti tank weapons fired from rooftops which were seen extensively in Chechnya, not meant to stop nlaws and javelins
Agreed. These improvements are like lipstick on a pig.
Won't help.
What do you honestly think, how many Ambrams would survived the similar conditions? I think they would perform only slightly better! Can a javelin knock out the most modern Western tanks? It is not like the Iraqy war when the crews reported only multiple rpg hits.
Will they glue the turrets on?
Nothing like a fight to teach you how to fight.
Best improvement to Russian tanks would be if they stopped using them to invade their neighbors.
This needs to be said over and over again. If Russia didn't threaten their neighbours, their neighbours wouldn't be joining the club which Russia wants to think is threatening them.
Georgia attacked first, ukraine provokated
@@pjdu5yifutd That, of course, is a lie.
@@pjdu5yifutd Provoked. There is no such word as provocated.
And of course, it's pure nonsense in both cases. Both Georgia and Ukraine reacted to having Russia stir up rebellians in Russian-majority areas. You trolls really must think the rest of the world is stupid......but unfortunately for you, we're not. We don't swallow Russian lies in the same way you do.
Those two "sensors" are there to improve flight capabilities. Once the turret has been lifted off into the air, it might stablilize flight performance.
Wow so brave
We won’t see these being fielded until the upgrade is completed
These are quick fixes that should have had this from the get go. Now the number of tanks has been greatly diminished thru combat losses and replacement equipment is hard to come by,.
I haven't seen destroyed T-90M. Either they are really low numbers or are actually pretty good. I saw Wagner operating one. It moves differently, looks faster.
It has the same problem all Russian manned tanks have, poor leadership and poorly trained crews. No matter how someone spins it, those 2 factors are a tank's worst enemies.
6 have been destroyed according to Oryx
@@nikolajovic1500 Figure how Ukraine had boasted about one destroyed tank, that was actually destroyed by Russia, I thought we would see them.
You talk like the Russian being a bunch of Warhammer 40k Orks thinking red make your vehicle move faster. But unlike Orks, their equipment doesn’t make you faster and even imagination magic ain’t gonna make them effective because of corruption and incompetence.
@@muzikizfun yeah, that and your willingness to swallow obvious fake news
How many tanks are being built/fixed/upgraded in russia pier each year?
Up to 300
You won't get access to that info until the war is over.
@@mrmacias4217 but they are as crap as ever before.
Losing 1,500+ a year, fixing 300 a year.
@@MrJC1 really? How? Theyre the same as before just getting era packages and thermals
Can we get, somewhat reliable, numbers about russian production? did they manage to ramp it up already to try and replace some losses or would it take years to get the production running to a level where we might see 500+ tanks a year being produced?