@howzerman1 no if a t90 was there abram woudnt stand a chance the active protection systems of the t90, shtora, and arena would make the t90 immpossible to hit plus the t90 would destroy the abrams at a distance of 5km while abrams max effective range is under 3kn (2miles)
@zackhanscom in chechnya they where being destroyed because the active protection arena was not there yet and officers stole the explosives in the kontact 5 armor and sold them
кто то говорит что у т90 и 80 пушки рассчитаны на ~1000 выстрелов и типа это го мало ну если танк на 30 мин максимум 1 час танкового боя хватает, то пока он свой боекомплект израсходует в чем я сомневаюсь его разберут быстрее, живучесть танка на поле бое 10-15 минет.... как то так
Alexander Postnikov, Commander of Russian Ground forces who, said "Military hardware produced by Russian defense contractors lags behind those from NATO members..The T-90 is the 17th modification of the T-72, It would be [better] to purchase...German Leopards..."
He knows the T-90 is just rehashed crap. Your politicians keep tellin you fanboys it's still state of the art...but the military knows the truth...
@howzerman1 i already told to them, we're saying sorry for what we did and we welcome us with open arms. afghanistan is our brother, unlike your fat american soldiers. afghan soldiers are war better than you, so tell it to your american soldier who've been raped by them.... :D
i hate fighting with retards on youtube, they need to just take these 2 tanks and have them compete vrs other and then have everyone shut the hell up!
@vigorousAtheist What is the point making new tanks when the old design is the best of the best? Soviet uses the sloped armor design which came from 1941 and they still use it. Why? Because it's effective, no tanks can match the T-90 the Abrams is barely on the line with the T-80
@vigorousAtheist wrong the Russians official tested and filmed and confirmed that their new superior armor can't be penetrated by the Depleted Uranium shell. This type of armor was already featured on the T-80 and all later versions of T-72 in Soviet army. It is Soviet Union who discovered this in 1980s. Russia doubled the frontal armor of the T-90 compared to T-80 and they tested the same type of gun that the M1A2 Abrams uses on the T-90 it proved ineffective against the frontal armor.
Lol first off, you're wrong about the t-90 not being exported. There are several orders in place as we speak.
And the test with the depleted uranium was not done with American weapons. We have tested all of our shells on russian tanks, which in turn have virtually the same design, only different alloys.
This isn't even bringing up the fact that the abrams is faster, quieter, has more hp/ton(for most models) and has more secondary weapons.
@vigorousAtheist *Insert Troll Dad Face here* The T-9001 has Laser beams guns and plasma armor and sun engine with the power of ten universes. This tanks can kill God in one shoot. Now your Abram is defenceless. Eat solar beam and burn and over 8000 quadrillion of the T-9001 is being made in one second. And exported to all Democratic Terrorist nations on the planet
"The M829A2 APFSDS round was developed specifically to address the improved protection of a Russian T-72, T-80U or T-90 main battle tank equipped with Kontakt-5 Explosive Reactive Armor"
T-90 beat the abrams in speed? Bullshit. The abrams is faster. Period.
And this isn't even BEGINNING to talk about the technological advantages that the abrams has.
So algeria and saudi arabia are close allies? BULLSHIT. Saudi arabia is more of a U.S. ally than saudi. Those two countries aren't even part of the SCO.
@vigorousAtheist Facts? If you call that 'FACTS' Then I don't know whetever your retarded or stupid. Please have EVIDENCE with it.
Or shut up. Once I had a video which explained that the test of a T-90 fired at with the M1A1 turret using sabot at the front armor and it didn't penetrate it. Since T-90 uses slope armor the bullets have a chance of bouncing off. Yes Modern ammunition sometimes do that
@vigorousAtheist Sorry but every time I go around looking for your information it proves you wrong and that I was right. And the US made a shell specially for T-90? Oh so they are actually preparing for war then. Well I wouldn't care less the T-90 still outperforms Abrams in all aspects and the T-90 is special made for Russian terrain. I can't say the same about the Abrams and even if a war did happen the Americans would lose as no one has ever successfully invaded Russia EVER
You still haven't told me what you want me to send you a source for.
No, the new round from the m1 was designed to penetrate modern alloys those of which are used on the t-90. It wasn't made JUST for the t-90, but for it's type of armor, alloys, which other tanks use as well.
How can you possibly say the t-90 outperforms? It doesn't even have auto stabilization, meaning it's not nearly as accurate as the m1 at full speeds, and its not as fast OR as quite OR as technologically advanced
@vigorousAtheist I don't know if you think the T-90 is a T-72 or something but let me get this straight n00b. T-90 is equiped with a Soviet Diesel engine design which is 10 times as more quite as a Turbine engine used in the M1A2 Abrams I don't know if you think a fucking Turbine is more silent then a Diesel but that's your opinion now let's keep our self to the facts here. T-90 is also from the 90s and is equiped with the latest tech there is. It has more technology then M1A2 Abrams
@SMGJohn The t-90's don't even have tank integration. Only a small amount of them even have night vision. And again, it doesn't even have auto stabilization, meaning that it can't track and hit a moving target at full speed.
And no you're completely wrong. A diesel engine is WAY louder than a turbine. This is the SOLE reason why we chose turbine and not diesel, because our turbine is small yet it's more powerful.
This is why the iraqis gave the m1 the nickname "whispering death".
@vigorousAtheist T-90 is equiped with a electronic fire controller and computerized stabilizator for the gun meaning it can hit targets far away while in high speed and while jumping around as the T-80 and T-90 is famous for.
And T-90 is faster then M1A2 Abrams why? Because T-90 is smaller and weights less it might not have as tick armor as the Abrams but the Soviet know how has allowed the Russians to build Soviet style armor which is super strong but keeps it's weight down.
lol once again you're LYING. The abrams top speed is 67km/hr
The t-90's is 60-65km/hr.
And the abrams has more power-to-weight than the majority of the t-90 models.
"The turbine is very quiet when compared to diesel engines of similar power output and produces a significantly different sound from a contemporary diesel tank engine,"
And remember, russia only has 400 t-90's while the U.S. has over 6000 abrams.
@vigorousAtheist During tests the T-90 proved to be more accurate and had a longer range then the Abrams. If you want a tanks to compare side to side with the Abrams try the T-80 it was made at same time as the Abrams. And it even got a turbine engine
@vigorousAtheist What is your point. Trying to tell me T-90 is not a tanks? You should get a new brain and a life troll. The Abrams is the ugliest Hummar I've seen in my life get lost.
Here champ. This video explains it all well it's Russian so it might be hard to believe for stupid retards like yourself but at least I gave my evidence or a small part of it anyway. Oh and this is a Russian show known for it's truth and reliability when it comes to weapon information
The video that you posted doesn't give ANY sources for it's claims.
Lol it's so funny how you have to resort to posting russian YOUTUBE videos as your proof.
And russian's are KNOWN for lying and being biased, the whole world knows this. And your video says nothing about the abram's new round. There's a REASON why the u.s. exports more military weapons than russia, because the rest of the world knows the US is more advanced.
@vigorousAtheist The US exports more weapon because they are bunch of loli raping monsters like yourself and you like your Abrams. You hump it every day before you go to the kinderconcentrationgarden
@vigorousAtheist Yeah yeah, I don't really give a fuck. We Norwegians, Finlanders, Chinese, Koreans, Indians, Russians and all Eastern Europe nations know that the T-90 is the best tanks in the world. It's East versus West buddy and it always have been and always will be.
hahaha norway is in NATO you twat. And South korea, which is much richer than the north is on the west's side.
And those other countries you mentioned besides finland are the worst developers of military weapons, so their opinion means nothing.
And i highly doubt finland thinks the t-90 is the best. Finland uses more western tanks than russian tanks by the way, so obviously they don't think russian tanks are better.
@vigorousAtheist LOL!? You judge by NATO alliances? Your retarded. Seriously go hang yourself you need too....
No False you imbecile, Finland has more Soviet tanks then Western tanks so again proven wrong. And no Norway was going to buy the T-90 after it tested it, I spoke with a few generals and people who worked in Military and saw the tests they admitted it was a better tanks then the Leopard 2A6 now the Leopard is better then Abrams so we all know what that means. South Korea bought T-90
@SMGJohn hahaha you're wrong yet again. Here are the number of tanks in the Finnish military- Leopard 2- 100 T-55- 30-40 HAHAHAHAHA do you need me to send you the url? Lol you "talked" to a few generals LOLOL yeah and im an astronaut. South korea has bought more American tanks than russian/soviet. Lol saying that the t-90 is better than the leopard 2 is probably the most retarded thing i have ever heard on the internet. You honestly need your brain checked
@vigorousAtheist Yes send me the URL I would love to see it. Oh and you forgot a few Soviet tanks...
Are you an astronaut? Oh that's cool. Well that actually explains why USA haven't reached Antartica yet. And they are still inventing the wheel and how to make fire. You seem to think Norwegian population is 4 billion? You must go back to school and learn we are only 4.9 Million you stupid kid, oh no! South Korea bought more from America? Yes, LOL back in Korean war....
@vigorousAtheist Yes America export most military weapons because America is the biggest terrorist nation on earth. Finland has some 120 T-72 locked away as reserves it's not listed any where but official Finnish military web page can confirm this however you have to speak Finnish to read it. They also have a total 74 T-55M but only 36 are in service as of now.
Leopard outnumbers the T-55 of course in service. It's obvious because T-55 is allot older
@vigorousAtheist LOL find that link yourself I'm not your slave fool. Use fucking Google or Wikipedia, and no I proved you wrong the T-90 has never been exported but the T-90E has. You surely know nothing do you ah feels good proving you wrong.
And no Finland does not buy the T-90 because Finland is part of NATO and no NATO nation I know of operates "enemy" weaponry.
hahaha you can easily direct me to the link if it were true. I directed YOU to the link that shows the finnish military having more western tanks, so you can do the same.
The t-90e is just an export version of the t-90, stop trying to make up ridiculous excuses.
Again, you said yourself that finland KNOWS the t-90 is better. There is no law in NATO saying they HAVE to use western tanks.
There are some countries in NATO that use soviet weapons you clown.
@vigorousAtheist There is no law of course stupid but it's not like Russia is ever going to fucking sell weapons to a gigantic organization that despite them. T-90E is different from the T-90 I pointed out the T-90 not being sold widely not the T-90E your point is false.
Those nations using Soviet Weaponry or the little there is, is being sold or thrown away they are mainly remains from countries that joined NATO after quitting the Warsaw Pact
i have already told you, that russia DOES sell weapons to countries in NATO. Why are you lying?
Lol you are one complete idiot. The t-90e was DESIGNED for export you CLOWN. Any country in the world can buy a t-90 if they wanted to. So WHY do countries choose tanks that cost MORE???
Again, im waiting for you to send me that source ;) lol obviously you were lying.
@vigorousAtheist So your retarded enough to explain to me something I already know? The T-90E is an export version yes but why the fuck are you explaining something I know from before?
No not any country can buy a T-90 it's not just go buy a fucking tanks, it's not that simple.
Because your trying to make a RIDCULOUS excuse that the t-90 hasn't been exported. That's like saying the f-16 hasn't been exported because America's model hasn't been exported.
And you're retarded. Russia WANTS to sell as many tanks as they can, so OBVIOUSLY they will sell them to whoever.
If norway wanted to buy the t-90 they could have. Just like they have other russian weapons(that are inferior)
@SMGJohn I'm from Finland and I can say that we're not part of NATO. But still I would prefer Russian equipment and Finnish defence forces have a lot of Russian euipment like bmp's and mi-8's. I think Russia is ahead in military equipment than other countries. Russia is also testing new tank called Black eagle and it's a new generation tank
@vigorousAtheist T-90 is currently not an export tanks and only exported to close allies to Russia such as India. T-90 also beat the M1A2 Abrams in terms of speed and all terrain ability. T-90 also have a bigger gun with better ability to penetrate modern armor, T-90 is smaller and based on Soviet designs which means smaller costs. And it uses Soviet style armor which means production costs are smaller compared to the American way where they just pack allot of steel around their tanks.
@BKISCADDENJR and all the other Challenger or Abrams ass kissers:
You've got through Irak for hundreds or thousands of klicks with those tanks.. And the whole world knows why. Try to do that in Russia and we'd trully know for sure whether the T-90s, T-80Us and even the T-72Bs are as bad as you believe them to be. You really suck with your damn bias.
@BKISCADDENJR umm no it cant.. you never fought against modern russian armor, if your counting that it be the same results that you had in iraq with the 72's 62's 55's 54's your gonna be in some serious shit bro
The T-80 and T-90 are not the best tanks in the world. I'd say they are the best tank for mass production and mass attack, but that's it. Sure, they have a fairly low silhouette for a MBT, but their armor isn't that strong. Their guns are quite powerful, but the T-80 still left much to be desired. Of course it's not their job to be super-powerful, it's to have more. It's always been the russian method. Why build a few strong tanks when you can build hundreds of nominal tanks?
@Panzershreck22 т80 танк быстрого прорыва....попробуй попади в танк который двигается со скоростью 8о км в час....а если и попадешь то будет рикошет...броню не пробить на скорости в такой силуэт...да и пехота разбежится увидев такую мощь на такой скорости и еще и стреляет на ходу)))
@igjr7511 but how often would the T-80 be in the conditions to run at a full 80mph? Maybe in parts of Eastern Europe but not in the West. Too many hedgerows, rivers, and small roads. In parts of the middle east? Most definitely. Mostly flat terrain is parts would allow the mass movement of armor at quite a fast pace.
@AKseries1 yes, on highways. But do highways cover all areas of a country? no. If the tank is placed in an area where there is limited space, such as most towns/cities, or in environments where tanks cannot properly move, such as mountainous terrain, the tank will not be able to perform at maximum effectiveness. Of course, this is with all armored vehicles
1) ""Sure, they have a fairly low silhouette for a MBT, but their armor isn't that strong"" Ты в натуре такой тупой или прикидываешься , на т-90 и т-80 установлена динамическая броня , которая почти не пробивается снарядами (кто не знает что такое динамическая защита введите в google ) это было проверенно на испытаниях в т-90 на расстоянии 200 метров выстрелили 5 120мм (сравнимыми со снарядами эбрамса )снарядами и после этого он поехал своим ходом
@NestrMadeinRussia I'm sorry, but I am not completely sure what you said. Google translate was iffy and some things came out awkward. Yes they did those tests to determine the resilience or the armor, but they forgot to take one crucial factor into consideration. The human factor. When a shell hits, there are a lot of forces released, regardless of it exploding or deflecting. There are documented reports of troops being injured by the shock reverberation when the shell hits.
@NestrMadeinRussia This however, occurs on all tanks. The American tanks have this issue, but don't really like to talk about it. The British have the same issue, and the Germans as well. But the Russian tanks have it the most difficulty. The forces also create much strain on the internal systems, like firing controls or basic electronics. Anyway, in my opinion, I think that the T-90 is on par, or better than the Abrams anyway....
@Panzershreck22 Дорогой друг введи google динамическая броня прочитай ...третье поколение этой защиты , защищает от бронебойных подкалиберных фугасных и кумулятивных боеприпасов.Смотрел документальные фильмы про войны где участвовали т-90 ,было много чего , но нигде не было сказано про осколки честное слово ))я тока не понял что ты хотел мне сказать про электронику ?? Она не уступает другим танкам если сравнивать не начальные образцы т-90 а последние модификации...
@Panzershreck22 В сравнении т-90 с M1A2 Abrams , т-90 выигрывает во всем! повторяю при последних модификациях, могу скинуть видео но там на русском языке (видео создано не каким нибудь малолеткой это копия документального фильма шедшего по одному из центральных каналов )Плюс т-90 может стрелять ракетами через гладко ствольную пушку и имеет комплекс оптико электронного подавления (эта система уводит ракеты противника в сторону) при стрельбе на расстоянии 5 км имеет почти100%точность
During a reported test conducted by the Russian military in 1999 the T-90 was exposed to a variety of RPG, ATGM and APFSDS munitions. When equipped with Kontakt-5 ERA the T-90 could not be penetrated by any of the APFSDS or ATGM used during the trial and outperformed a T-80U which also took part.[39] During combat operations in Dagestan, there were witness accounts of one T-90 sustaining seven hits from RPGs, and remaining in action
@grimlsd420 far superior? Hardly. The Abrams may have a superior armor composition, but it's engine systems are it's weakness. It especially has poor fuel ratings in desert operations.
A challanger 2 would put a round through and out the other side of a T 90 at more than 2km and it has a larger round with supersonic ammunition which is 7x faster than SABOT or HESH
@ENGxXsamXxENG - What? xD 120mm / 125mm... now what round is biggest? 7x faster than APFSDS? Our APFSDS has muzzle velocity of 1,700mps. You are telling me NATO have some round who travel 6,000+mps? LOL your comment is most retarded one I ever saw. xD
@bittemeinrammstein they shoot titanium kinetic energy rounds from the Abrams and is armour is unknown on the table of elements simply because it can take a round a keep on chugin lol with its gas turbine engine haha, one shot is all America ever need hiroshima fuck you nagasaki just cause we can so fuck you commies,you simply say you hate America because you want to be us thats why so many people do its true power has always been oppressed well fuck you, btw look up the moons ours,to bad so sad
@The357python Are you mentally retarded? No, you're just a typical American cunt who comes in and spews things that he doesn't know or things that make no sense whatsoever. First, the armour on the Abrams is made with a depleted uranium composition. Is Uranium an unknown element? NO. It's element 92 on the periodic table. Second, I don't know why you put anything with Japan or communism because they are completely unrelated to this video. Japan was never communist, and Russia hasn't been for 20y
@The357python and finally, no one wants to be like you. 1/3 of the population obese, most of the population is suffering from the economic downfall. You say you are the best country in the world? You've fucked it up more times than any other in your short existence. The one thing which really bothers me about you, is how utterly ignorant you are.
2 kilometers? Wow, that's a nice distance. The problem is, though, that T-90's rounds penetrate enemy tanks armor at up to 5 kilometers (in case of HE rounds, it's up to 10 kilometers). I'l do the math for you, it's 2.5x bigger range for armor piercing rounds and 5x the distance for HE rounds. So your challenger 2 would have been a pile of burning garbage at 2 kilometers in case it met T-90 in a real combat situation.
Okay Plebes, listen up. I've managed all three tanks, so here's a one-time, freebee. Abrams sports reactive side-suite and rear cage protection, alongside vastly superior imaging and communication packages. Additionally, Abe is balanced for future kinetic impact - it, and Chall are battle tested and worthy. The 90 has slop low gears, poor interface (due to corrected), and a dog drive to weight ratio with sizable drift. Finally, the 80 - seriously? Not enough characters her to piont bad!
i do find it very funny lol all theses folks posting bold claims with not a clue as to what they are talking about.............. get out into the real world and maybe you wont look like such a pleb !!!!your little T90 sits about 10th on a normal persons list
@wolframixx ok, i'll agree with you. just tell me how: "technology in the abrams is far superior. " and why "the t-90 is already outdated =)". i am really just interested in your thoughts and not trying to troll you or anything.
There actually not. The T-80 did horribly in the first Chechen war and the T-90 was out preformed by the Indian Arjun in testing and in there own testing the Russian Army penetrated the Frontal amour of a T-90 with an RPG-29 with one round. And in combat the RPG-29 has been fired at M1s and Challengers frontal Armour and has not penetrated.Just be realistic, there both designed of tanks that are now 60 and 40 years old and the Russian military and industry is still suffering from 90's
@SkullKing11841 so then indian army quickly proceeded to order 300 t-90 because it was "out preformed by the Indian Arjun in testing"? also, "in combat the RPG-29 has been fired at M1s and Challengers frontal Armour and has not penetrated", 1st, WHERE in combat (as in which combat) were rpg-29 fired @ abrams, and don't tell me iraq war, lol, i'll laugh at you. and and did w/e fired them linded it up to hit the thickest part of the tank's armor only?
@val28l In 2010 the Indian's did the test of the Arjun against the T-90, Where the Arjun out preformed it, the reason they ordered the 300 T-90s was the Arjun was lagging in production and some problems were coming up. So to fill the numbers the Arjun wasn't going to be able to fill anytime soon they ordered 300 T-90's. The Russian's were the one's who fired a RPG-29 at a T-90's frontal amour in testing and the RPG-29 penetrated it, they admitted it.
@val28l Ahh yeah actually in Iraq they have. The Iranian's have RPG-29's which they gave to the Insurgency's in Iraq. There was a Challenger 2 that got it by about 15 RPG-7's and one Milan Anti-tank missile, were the the only damage it sustained was the Gun Sight was knocked out buy the Milan. Look im sure if the Russian's hadn't canceled the T-95, that would have been up there with the best of them. But the T-90 and very much so about the T-80 are not the Best tanks in the world.
@SkullKing11841 yeah... iranians just GAVE rpg 29 to iraqis.... lol!!! since iranians are shiites, and iraqi are sunites, who hate each other. don't forget the wars they had. now, i know that iranians hate us, but they like iraqis no more then they like americans. now, do you have a PROOF that insurgency fighters used rpg-29, and not 7? video, photos, anything?
Part 1 With regards to the Iranians and the Iraqi's. There's a large Shia population in Iraq, it's actually the Major ethic group in Iraq. JAM was a Shia militia that fought MNF-I, AQI, and attacked the Sunni Population during the civil war and the Sunni's did the same and went to AQI for help, and so on you get the whole civil war/ sectarian violence/ethnic cleansing thing that happened. It was well known that JAM and other shia militia's were being supplied by Iran.
@SkullKing11841 i will also make a separate post regarding "Challenger 2 that got it by about 15 RPG-7's and one Milan Anti-tank missile", again, do you have proof? videos, pictures, anything. because why stop at 15? in another video, some guy claimed it was 70 (seventy lol!!!) rpg hits that challenger took and lived. now, i know of some t-90s that had taken multiple rpg hits and survived. there are numerous pictures i can provide, that show t-90 tanks after few rpg hits and atgm.
@SkullKing11841 honestly, i would like to see some pictures, that prove anything that you say. i am not saying that you are wrong, it's just that you make statements, yet you are providing no proof to what you're saying. so, as far as i'm concerned, you're just talking out of your ass without any knowledge of the subject (and i mean it in a nicest way w/o trying to insult you at all).
@val28l Part 1 With regards to the Iranians and the Iraqi's. There's a large Shia population in Iraq, it's actually the Major ethic group in Iraq. JAM was a Shia militia that fought MNF-I, AQI, and attacked the Sunni Population during the civil war and the Sunni's did the same and went to AQI for help, and so on you get the whole civil war/ sectarian violence/ethnic cleansing thing that happened. It was well known that JAM and other shia militia's were being supplied by Iran.
@val28l Part 3 ' LiveLeak.com - RPG-29 vs M1A2 ' ( < google that) That RPG-29 wounded one crew member and ' 20.10.1999 T-80U and T-90 Protection Trials ' (< google that) you can read it all if you want but the summery is down the bottom. You know what as I’ve been searching around. I found that one RPG-29 could knock out a T-90 but if you fired 2 RPG-29s at either an M1 or Chall 2 in the same place, you would defiantly kill it.
@val28l Part 4 “The most lopsided achievement of the M1A2s was the destruction of seven T-72 Lion of Babylon tanks in a point-blank skirmish (less than 50 yards (46 m)) near Mahmoudiyah, about 18 miles (29 km) south of Baghdad, with no losses for the American side. “ Heavy Metal: A Tank Company's Battle to Baghdad. I can’t find anything on the Chall vs those RPG-7’s plus one Milan, it was on a TV show. I doubt the RPG-7’s that were fired at the Challenger would even penetrate a T-90.
@val28l Part 5 70 “7’s”?? I think 70 is bullshit. How would one tank be hit by 70 and not have pulled out, or at least destroyed the area it was taking hit’s from. 70 would get through a Nimitz class CV lol.
I think the whole point of my original comment/s was that the T-90 – 80 are not the best tanks in the world. I’m not all blindly pro American and thinking that the M1 is like a Wehrmacht MK 6 Tiger against a Soviet T-26 being all other modern day MBT’s.
@val28l Part 6 Plus air power matters a little more than having the best tanks, probably the reason Russia cancelled the T-95) If I was a Soldier and in a 3-4 years I will be, and I saw a whole bunch of T-90’s coming towards me, even if we had our own Amour (M1 AIM Australia’s equivalent of the M1A2) I’d still be scared because that 125mm could fuck shit up, plus the M1 is under gunned compared to other tanks. L44 cal gun compared to what is could have, L55 cal like on the Chalenger 2 and Leo 2.
@val28l Part 7 If you want to put other info up, that’d be good, I do enjoy reading and learning about this stuff. :) (oh that 3-4 years comment doesn’t mean I’m 14 btw hahaha)
@SkullKing11841 ok, that was an excellent rant, i should +1 you for the shear effort. but tbh, i could not at all understand what you are saying. i guess that your point is that t-90 and t-80 are not the best tanks in the world, and you also stated that challenger and abrams aren't as good as everyone says. i think. is that what you're saying? correct me if i'm wrong please. now, for the second part of my post, which tank model do you think is #1 in the world today?
@val28l Hahaha yeah it was fairly long haha :) Well people seem to get all bias and talk them up to much, if you look at the Chinese T-95 i think it is, on paper it seems match western tanks, i don't know about the electronics, but it surprised me.
Well my Favorite would probably be a PanzerKamfWagen Mark 6 Tiger, but I'd take a Mark 5 Panther to war over it. The best today if i had to choose to save my life, I'd say the German Leopard 2A7 and the U.S has the best tank crew's. :) What's your's?
@SkullKing11841 i would go with the latest t-90 or t-80 modifications, probably t-90m, which is almost invincible at this point. i would REALLY like to look into russian armata, but it is not yet out, and not much is known about it, as it is highly secretive.
@SkullKing11841 Most western countries have better tank crews thanks to simulations where the officers can overwatch the crews preformance. I dont think there is such a think in Russia.
@SkullKing11841 "Part 4 “The most lopsided achievement of the M1A2s was the destruction of seven T-72 Lion of Babylon tanks"
Is this really a point you're trying to make? I personally wouldn't compare the crappy Iraqi "T-72", to a Russian one as it has inferior armour (worse the a T-72A), and the Iraqi's used ammo that the soviets phased out in 1973.
Also it doesn't even fire a ATGM.
The t-80 has nothing to do with those "T-72's", and the T-90 has evolved 2 generations.
@roknikov Yeah i know i wasnt comparing the Iraqi T-72 to the T-90 (that was not even up to standard of late Soviet models of the T-72)
Dont remember why i used that quote, but it was probaly becasue the other guy was talking about Iraqi T-72's against M1's which is such an unfair fight.
T-90 hasnt evoved 2 generations it's a 4th not 5th, same as M1,Chall 2,Leo 2A6
@SkullKing11841 Well concidering you had the T-72B (uprated sandwich armour, ATGM firing capability) after the T-72A, which followed the T-72's basic design.
The T-80's are IMO a more advanced generation of tanks compared to the T-72 even though they were built at the same time. (Also it's not that easy to compare the Soviet gear to US gear due to the totally different design philosophy, i meant it like "production generations".
@roknikov Being built/Upgraded at the same time i would have thought they'd be very simmilar and the T-72 would be like a bigger brother to the T-80 with it's bigger gun and thicker amour. Although i saw a video that said a simmilar thing, didnt explain why but, i may look into it one day.
yeah it was well made, i dont think it was a bias video towards soveit tanks, but it would have been good if he mentioned some draw backs to some of the advantages.
@SkullKing11841 I allready saw the vid and it's really well made, however, it thought it was typical there wasn't anything said about the fact that Soviet tanks can't lower their cannons as far as western tanks do.
(which as most people know is because the lower overall height of the Soviet type turrets, which restrict gun movement.)
The second part of the video is also quite informative btw ;)
:Military experts simulated a showdown between the Russian T-90 tank and the German Leopard 2A6 to verify the claims by some Russian generals that the Russian hardware was inferior to its NATO analogues. Using mathematical models to simulate a battle between the Russian and the German tank, experts concluded that in a real battle the Leopard would not stand a chance of coming within a shooting distance of T-90
most western theory about tank design superiority is based on the encounters between 4th generation american and british designs{abrams and challenger} and israeli{merkavas}with well trained crews and air superiority dispatching antiquated T 55 and 60 with poorly trained crews and tactics and also T 72s again poorly led and trained the latest generation of soviet tanks have yet to be met in combat and with vastly improved electronics and night fighting capabilities they may prove equal 2 task.
T-80 and 90 the BEST? I doubt it. The Russians are hardly known for putting out the BEST in military equipment. They have always been QUANTITY over QUALITY. Now I'm sure these tanks are rather capable front line fighters, but they are no match for an Abrams, Leopard, Challenger, or Leclerc.
Put a few in the hands of the Syrians and watch the Izzie Merkavas lay waste to them.
Sorry mister video creator, but the T-90's armor is 550mm RHAe (830mm with Kontakt-5). The T-80 also had 550mm, but it had 780mm with Kontakt-5. The T-80 was put to bed because of the First Chechen War, which proved that had a vulnerable gas-turbine engine.
@JumpingonYubTub - sorry mr. guy who do know anything on tanks... T-90A armour with no ERA is 900-1,000mm equal to RHA, with ERA he increase to 1,455mm on rough estimate. T-80U armour with ERA 1,100mm~. I serve on T-72B and work at T-80U in army 3 years, kiddo. ;)
@bittemeinrammstein Thos are the values for Chemical Energy. I was using the values for Kinetic Energy (the most common type of attack used in tank vs tank combat).
@bittemeinrammstein Nope. The armor on a T-90 (and any modern tank, for that matter) has increased resistance to Chemical Energy versus Kinetic Energy. Here's the model most people agree on:
T-90 vs KE: 550 mm + 280mm with Kontakt-5 = 830mm
T-90 vs KE: vs HEAT: 650 mm + 700mm with Kontakt-5 = 1,350mm
@JumpingonYubTub - whats most funny is HEAT round usually do more damage than APDSFS KE rounds... for example tests done on T-72B1 in state trials USA where APDSFS round dont penetrate... APDSFS round used on tests was M829A2... so how to explain this? Wikipedia/FAS figures is wrong obviously... real test prove more strong than phantom figures who have no certificate, sorry mate.
The figure of 650mm RHAe vs HEAT projectiles was proven incorrect over 10 years ago, during armour protection trials, T-90 tanks were tested against various AT weapons, during these trials a T-90 without K-5 reactive armour was also tested, it withstood multiple hits from a Kornet ATGM, which has a claimed penetration figure much higher than 650mm RHAe, therefore it is safe to claim that this accepted figure of 650mm RHAe is incorrect.
@vtkrey There's a slight problem there: The Kornet uses a HEAT warhead. The 650mm figure (which is more like 560mm, considering the extreme similarity between the T-90 and T-72) is for Kinetic Energy. HEAT rounds use Chemical Energy. There's a big difference, especially when the average MBT nowadays has a higher resistance to CE than KE (the T-90 included).
Are these the same t-80 and t-90 used by Iraq that were destroyed in mass during the US M1 MBT (coalition) wars in Iraqi dessert? What a shame...
howzerman1 3 weeks ago
@howzerman1 no if a t90 was there abram woudnt stand a chance the active protection systems of the t90, shtora, and arena would make the t90 immpossible to hit plus the t90 would destroy the abrams at a distance of 5km while abrams max effective range is under 3kn (2miles)
meee2014 1 week ago
hard to aggree
AmNotLegend 3 weeks ago
the abrams is the best tank in the world due to real world data. the t-90 and t-80 are good on paper and average in battle.(see chechnya)
zackhanscom 1 month ago
@zackhanscom in chechnya they where being destroyed because the active protection arena was not there yet and officers stole the explosives in the kontact 5 armor and sold them
meee2014 1 week ago
кто то говорит что у т90 и 80 пушки рассчитаны на ~1000 выстрелов и типа это го мало ну если танк на 30 мин максимум 1 час танкового боя хватает, то пока он свой боекомплект израсходует в чем я сомневаюсь его разберут быстрее, живучесть танка на поле бое 10-15 минет.... как то так
Lyklan 1 month ago
миры самый большой резервуар!
Also БЕЗНОГNМ
Bloodlust20101983 1 month ago
Я служил на Т-80.Отличный танк!!!!!
boss4310g 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Alexander Postnikov, Commander of Russian Ground forces who, said "Military hardware produced by Russian defense contractors lags behind those from NATO members..The T-90 is the 17th modification of the T-72, It would be [better] to purchase...German Leopards..."
He knows the T-90 is just rehashed crap. Your politicians keep tellin you fanboys it's still state of the art...but the military knows the truth...
Takster 1 month ago
Лучший в мире? Нет. Цена-качество. Да
alldifficult 2 months ago
RUSSIA HAS THE BEST WEAPONS EVER!!!!!!!
sergeikozin47 2 months ago
@sergeikozin47 Tell that to the Afghanistan peasants who sent you home crying.
howzerman1 3 weeks ago
@howzerman1 i already told to them, we're saying sorry for what we did and we welcome us with open arms. afghanistan is our brother, unlike your fat american soldiers. afghan soldiers are war better than you, so tell it to your american soldier who've been raped by them.... :D
sergeikozin47 2 weeks ago
@sergeikozin47 Tell it to the little Chechens, they don't think so.
howzerman1 3 weeks ago
@howzerman1 we also told them that we crushed them.. :D
sergeikozin47 2 weeks ago
"Saudi arabia is more of a U.S. ally than *russian*"
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
i hate fighting with retards on youtube, they need to just take these 2 tanks and have them compete vrs other and then have everyone shut the hell up!
AKseries1 2 months ago
Да ваш абрамс т54 разберет как нефиг делать.
andrewilife 3 months ago
Title, Hahaha! ^.^
dembol754 3 months ago
Самый большой резервуар! Бу-га-га!
MrTitanic22 3 months ago
This video is hilarious. The t-90 and t-80 aren't even in the top 3 best tanks in the world.
Not even close
vigorousAtheist 3 months ago
@vigorousAtheist thats just not on the west side
AKseries1 2 months ago
@AKseries1
Exactly. There are MANY countries in the West and all of them know that the t-90 or t-80 aren't in the top 3 list of tanks.
All they are is souped up old tanks. They aren't modern in the slightest sense.
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist What is the point making new tanks when the old design is the best of the best? Soviet uses the sloped armor design which came from 1941 and they still use it. Why? Because it's effective, no tanks can match the T-90 the Abrams is barely on the line with the T-80
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
Wow. your comment is laughable. Any modern depleted uranium American tank shell can destroy a t-90.
Did you seriously just say the t-90 is better than the abrams? WOW.
Why is it that abrams has sold more to foreign buyers yet it's MORE expensive?
Lol comparing a t-90 to an abrams is like comparing a bicycle to a lamborghini.
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist wrong the Russians official tested and filmed and confirmed that their new superior armor can't be penetrated by the Depleted Uranium shell. This type of armor was already featured on the T-80 and all later versions of T-72 in Soviet army. It is Soviet Union who discovered this in 1980s. Russia doubled the frontal armor of the T-90 compared to T-80 and they tested the same type of gun that the M1A2 Abrams uses on the T-90 it proved ineffective against the frontal armor.
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
Lol first off, you're wrong about the t-90 not being exported. There are several orders in place as we speak.
And the test with the depleted uranium was not done with American weapons. We have tested all of our shells on russian tanks, which in turn have virtually the same design, only different alloys.
This isn't even bringing up the fact that the abrams is faster, quieter, has more hp/ton(for most models) and has more secondary weapons.
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist *Insert Troll Dad Face here* The T-9001 has Laser beams guns and plasma armor and sun engine with the power of ten universes. This tanks can kill God in one shoot. Now your Abram is defenceless. Eat solar beam and burn and over 8000 quadrillion of the T-9001 is being made in one second. And exported to all Democratic Terrorist nations on the planet
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
continued-
"The M829A2 APFSDS round was developed specifically to address the improved protection of a Russian T-72, T-80U or T-90 main battle tank equipped with Kontakt-5 Explosive Reactive Armor"
T-90 beat the abrams in speed? Bullshit. The abrams is faster. Period.
And this isn't even BEGINNING to talk about the technological advantages that the abrams has.
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
continued-
"and only exported to close allies to Russia "
So algeria and saudi arabia are close allies? BULLSHIT. Saudi arabia is more of a U.S. ally than saudi. Those two countries aren't even part of the SCO.
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist Since you wanted to troll I return with trolling you even harder. Have a nice day sir. May you face a T-90 and see the difference
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
lol i post facts and all you can do is post fantasy.
Epic facepalm.
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist Facts? If you call that 'FACTS' Then I don't know whetever your retarded or stupid. Please have EVIDENCE with it.
Or shut up. Once I had a video which explained that the test of a T-90 fired at with the M1A1 turret using sabot at the front armor and it didn't penetrate it. Since T-90 uses slope armor the bullets have a chance of bouncing off. Yes Modern ammunition sometimes do that
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
What are you talking about? What are you asking me to send proof of? Cause i can send sources for every claim i've made.
And you don't seem to understand my quote. The U.S. made a round SPECIFICALLY for the t-90 tank.
I promise you russia didn't test it with this weapon.
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist Sorry but every time I go around looking for your information it proves you wrong and that I was right. And the US made a shell specially for T-90? Oh so they are actually preparing for war then. Well I wouldn't care less the T-90 still outperforms Abrams in all aspects and the T-90 is special made for Russian terrain. I can't say the same about the Abrams and even if a war did happen the Americans would lose as no one has ever successfully invaded Russia EVER
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
You still haven't told me what you want me to send you a source for.
No, the new round from the m1 was designed to penetrate modern alloys those of which are used on the t-90. It wasn't made JUST for the t-90, but for it's type of armor, alloys, which other tanks use as well.
How can you possibly say the t-90 outperforms? It doesn't even have auto stabilization, meaning it's not nearly as accurate as the m1 at full speeds, and its not as fast OR as quite OR as technologically advanced
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist I don't know if you think the T-90 is a T-72 or something but let me get this straight n00b. T-90 is equiped with a Soviet Diesel engine design which is 10 times as more quite as a Turbine engine used in the M1A2 Abrams I don't know if you think a fucking Turbine is more silent then a Diesel but that's your opinion now let's keep our self to the facts here. T-90 is also from the 90s and is equiped with the latest tech there is. It has more technology then M1A2 Abrams
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn The t-90's don't even have tank integration. Only a small amount of them even have night vision. And again, it doesn't even have auto stabilization, meaning that it can't track and hit a moving target at full speed.
And no you're completely wrong. A diesel engine is WAY louder than a turbine. This is the SOLE reason why we chose turbine and not diesel, because our turbine is small yet it's more powerful.
This is why the iraqis gave the m1 the nickname "whispering death".
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist T-90 is equiped with a electronic fire controller and computerized stabilizator for the gun meaning it can hit targets far away while in high speed and while jumping around as the T-80 and T-90 is famous for.
And T-90 is faster then M1A2 Abrams why? Because T-90 is smaller and weights less it might not have as tick armor as the Abrams but the Soviet know how has allowed the Russians to build Soviet style armor which is super strong but keeps it's weight down.
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
lol once again you're LYING. The abrams top speed is 67km/hr
The t-90's is 60-65km/hr.
And the abrams has more power-to-weight than the majority of the t-90 models.
"The turbine is very quiet when compared to diesel engines of similar power output and produces a significantly different sound from a contemporary diesel tank engine,"
And remember, russia only has 400 t-90's while the U.S. has over 6000 abrams.
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist During tests the T-90 proved to be more accurate and had a longer range then the Abrams. If you want a tanks to compare side to side with the Abrams try the T-80 it was made at same time as the Abrams. And it even got a turbine engine
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
continued-
And which tests are you speaking of that the t-80 went up against the abrams? Can you send the source in a personal message?
The t-90 also doesn't have the protection over it's ammunition that the abrams has. It's the same flaw that has flooded T-72's.
And no, the t-90 doesn't have a longer range. Again, you need to look up on our development of new rounds.
And once again, the t-90 doesn't have tank integration, which is probably the most useful tool a tank can have
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist What is your point. Trying to tell me T-90 is not a tanks? You should get a new brain and a life troll. The Abrams is the ugliest Hummar I've seen in my life get lost.
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist
watch?v=kAofuApy5sc&feature=related
Here champ. This video explains it all well it's Russian so it might be hard to believe for stupid retards like yourself but at least I gave my evidence or a small part of it anyway. Oh and this is a Russian show known for it's truth and reliability when it comes to weapon information
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
The video that you posted doesn't give ANY sources for it's claims.
Lol it's so funny how you have to resort to posting russian YOUTUBE videos as your proof.
And russian's are KNOWN for lying and being biased, the whole world knows this. And your video says nothing about the abram's new round. There's a REASON why the u.s. exports more military weapons than russia, because the rest of the world knows the US is more advanced.
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist The US exports more weapon because they are bunch of loli raping monsters like yourself and you like your Abrams. You hump it every day before you go to the kinderconcentrationgarden
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
Yeah i like the abrams because i (and the rest of the world) knows that it's superior to any other tank out there.
T-90 isn't even ranked as the top 3 best tanks, even by other countries.
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist Yeah yeah, I don't really give a fuck. We Norwegians, Finlanders, Chinese, Koreans, Indians, Russians and all Eastern Europe nations know that the T-90 is the best tanks in the world. It's East versus West buddy and it always have been and always will be.
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
hahaha norway is in NATO you twat. And South korea, which is much richer than the north is on the west's side.
And those other countries you mentioned besides finland are the worst developers of military weapons, so their opinion means nothing.
And i highly doubt finland thinks the t-90 is the best. Finland uses more western tanks than russian tanks by the way, so obviously they don't think russian tanks are better.
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist LOL!? You judge by NATO alliances? Your retarded. Seriously go hang yourself you need too....
No False you imbecile, Finland has more Soviet tanks then Western tanks so again proven wrong. And no Norway was going to buy the T-90 after it tested it, I spoke with a few generals and people who worked in Military and saw the tests they admitted it was a better tanks then the Leopard 2A6 now the Leopard is better then Abrams so we all know what that means. South Korea bought T-90
SMGJohn 2 months ago
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist Yes send me the URL I would love to see it. Oh and you forgot a few Soviet tanks...
Are you an astronaut? Oh that's cool. Well that actually explains why USA haven't reached Antartica yet. And they are still inventing the wheel and how to make fire. You seem to think Norwegian population is 4 billion? You must go back to school and learn we are only 4.9 Million you stupid kid, oh no! South Korea bought more from America? Yes, LOL back in Korean war....
Lost again? I think so
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
Go and google- "list of equipment in the finnish military".
Can't wait for your response ;)
And we're talking about Main Battle Tanks, not small infantry vehicles and what not.
The FACT is that finland has around 30 T-55's and 100 Leopard 2's.
So yes, you're wrong YET AGAIN.
When did i say norway had a 4 billion population? WTF?
And south korea STILL buys more American weapons than russian.
Remember, America exports the most military weapons out of the whole world.
;)
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist Yes America export most military weapons because America is the biggest terrorist nation on earth. Finland has some 120 T-72 locked away as reserves it's not listed any where but official Finnish military web page can confirm this however you have to speak Finnish to read it. They also have a total 74 T-55M but only 36 are in service as of now.
Leopard outnumbers the T-55 of course in service. It's obvious because T-55 is allot older
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
Give me the link to the webpage that shows 120 t-72 in the finnish military. I can use an online translator.
And besides, those are LOCKED AWAY(even if it's true) those aren't the ones in service.
The fact remains that finland has more western tanks in service than russian. That's a fact.
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist Sure they have more western tanks in service but they still have more Soviet tanks. And that was my point not the tanks in service.
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
i asked for you to send me the link.
And if finland chooses to have more western tanks in service, then they obviously know our technology is better.
And besides, wasn't it you who said finland thinks the t-90 is best? So why would they spend MORE for a tank that they think is inferior to the t-90?
And don't give me this bullshit about russia only selling it to close allies, because i already proved that wrong
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist LOL find that link yourself I'm not your slave fool. Use fucking Google or Wikipedia, and no I proved you wrong the T-90 has never been exported but the T-90E has. You surely know nothing do you ah feels good proving you wrong.
And no Finland does not buy the T-90 because Finland is part of NATO and no NATO nation I know of operates "enemy" weaponry.
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
hahaha you can easily direct me to the link if it were true. I directed YOU to the link that shows the finnish military having more western tanks, so you can do the same.
The t-90e is just an export version of the t-90, stop trying to make up ridiculous excuses.
Again, you said yourself that finland KNOWS the t-90 is better. There is no law in NATO saying they HAVE to use western tanks.
There are some countries in NATO that use soviet weapons you clown.
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist There is no law of course stupid but it's not like Russia is ever going to fucking sell weapons to a gigantic organization that despite them. T-90E is different from the T-90 I pointed out the T-90 not being sold widely not the T-90E your point is false.
Those nations using Soviet Weaponry or the little there is, is being sold or thrown away they are mainly remains from countries that joined NATO after quitting the Warsaw Pact
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
i have already told you, that russia DOES sell weapons to countries in NATO. Why are you lying?
Lol you are one complete idiot. The t-90e was DESIGNED for export you CLOWN. Any country in the world can buy a t-90 if they wanted to. So WHY do countries choose tanks that cost MORE???
Again, im waiting for you to send me that source ;) lol obviously you were lying.
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist So your retarded enough to explain to me something I already know? The T-90E is an export version yes but why the fuck are you explaining something I know from before?
No not any country can buy a T-90 it's not just go buy a fucking tanks, it's not that simple.
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn
Because your trying to make a RIDCULOUS excuse that the t-90 hasn't been exported. That's like saying the f-16 hasn't been exported because America's model hasn't been exported.
And you're retarded. Russia WANTS to sell as many tanks as they can, so OBVIOUSLY they will sell them to whoever.
If norway wanted to buy the t-90 they could have. Just like they have other russian weapons(that are inferior)
vigorousAtheist 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist LOL your so stupid. Come back when you learned that Russia is not America
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@SMGJohn I'm from Finland and I can say that we're not part of NATO. But still I would prefer Russian equipment and Finnish defence forces have a lot of Russian euipment like bmp's and mi-8's. I think Russia is ahead in military equipment than other countries. Russia is also testing new tank called Black eagle and it's a new generation tank
video link: /watch?v=Q0b-41guETE
EEVERSTI 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist t-90 has the BEST tank crew, that's the big difference...
sergeikozin47 2 months ago
@vigorousAtheist T-90 is currently not an export tanks and only exported to close allies to Russia such as India. T-90 also beat the M1A2 Abrams in terms of speed and all terrain ability. T-90 also have a bigger gun with better ability to penetrate modern armor, T-90 is smaller and based on Soviet designs which means smaller costs. And it uses Soviet style armor which means production costs are smaller compared to the American way where they just pack allot of steel around their tanks.
SMGJohn 2 months ago
@BKISCADDENJR and all the other Challenger or Abrams ass kissers:
You've got through Irak for hundreds or thousands of klicks with those tanks.. And the whole world knows why. Try to do that in Russia and we'd trully know for sure whether the T-90s, T-80Us and even the T-72Bs are as bad as you believe them to be. You really suck with your damn bias.
feriekonto 4 months ago
The abrams is so much more advanced than that peice of shit!! Hell the M1 could kill both of those befor either could figure out what happend!!
BKISCADDENJR 4 months ago
@BKISCADDENJR umm no it cant.. you never fought against modern russian armor, if your counting that it be the same results that you had in iraq with the 72's 62's 55's 54's your gonna be in some serious shit bro
AKseries1 2 months ago
M1A1 could destroy T-80 by one shot!!!! lol
90magor 4 months ago
@90magor
...and vice versa.
vtkrey 3 months ago
@vtkrey yes, but abrams is oldest than T-80 and still fight good lol
90magor 3 months ago
@90magor
If I am not mistaken, Abrams entered service in 1980, T-80 entered service in 1976.
vtkrey 3 months ago
@vtkrey nope T-80 is from 1985!!!!
90magor 3 months ago
@90magor
Incorrect, in 1985 was introduced T-80U variant, but T-80 variant was introduced in 1976.
vtkrey 3 months ago
@vtkrey and abrams was invited in 1976 but made in 1980
90magor 3 months ago
@90magor take all the electronics off of it and modernization
AKseries1 2 months ago
Т-90 единственный танк который прошел почти 3000 км по малайским джунглям,по бездорожью в котором застряли все остальные танки этого же класса ...
NestrMadeinRussia 4 months ago
Т-90 самый большой резервуар?)))
MrTitanic22 4 months ago
The T-80 and T-90 are not the best tanks in the world. I'd say they are the best tank for mass production and mass attack, but that's it. Sure, they have a fairly low silhouette for a MBT, but their armor isn't that strong. Their guns are quite powerful, but the T-80 still left much to be desired. Of course it's not their job to be super-powerful, it's to have more. It's always been the russian method. Why build a few strong tanks when you can build hundreds of nominal tanks?
Panzershreck22 4 months ago
@Panzershreck22 BUT, the T-90 is an all round improvement and is a far better tank than it's predecessors.
Panzershreck22 4 months ago
@Panzershreck22 т80 танк быстрого прорыва....попробуй попади в танк который двигается со скоростью 8о км в час....а если и попадешь то будет рикошет...броню не пробить на скорости в такой силуэт...да и пехота разбежится увидев такую мощь на такой скорости и еще и стреляет на ходу)))
igjr7511 4 months ago
@igjr7511 but how often would the T-80 be in the conditions to run at a full 80mph? Maybe in parts of Eastern Europe but not in the West. Too many hedgerows, rivers, and small roads. In parts of the middle east? Most definitely. Mostly flat terrain is parts would allow the mass movement of armor at quite a fast pace.
Panzershreck22 4 months ago
@Panzershreck22 do you even know you guys have a thing as highways..... put that sucker on a straight away and on cruise control and your set
AKseries1 2 months ago
@AKseries1 yes, on highways. But do highways cover all areas of a country? no. If the tank is placed in an area where there is limited space, such as most towns/cities, or in environments where tanks cannot properly move, such as mountainous terrain, the tank will not be able to perform at maximum effectiveness. Of course, this is with all armored vehicles
Panzershreck22 2 months ago
@Panzershreck22
бля ну ты и наговорил.....
1) ""Sure, they have a fairly low silhouette for a MBT, but their armor isn't that strong"" Ты в натуре такой тупой или прикидываешься , на т-90 и т-80 установлена динамическая броня , которая почти не пробивается снарядами (кто не знает что такое динамическая защита введите в google ) это было проверенно на испытаниях в т-90 на расстоянии 200 метров выстрелили 5 120мм (сравнимыми со снарядами эбрамса )снарядами и после этого он поехал своим ходом
NestrMadeinRussia 4 months ago
@NestrMadeinRussia I'm sorry, but I am not completely sure what you said. Google translate was iffy and some things came out awkward. Yes they did those tests to determine the resilience or the armor, but they forgot to take one crucial factor into consideration. The human factor. When a shell hits, there are a lot of forces released, regardless of it exploding or deflecting. There are documented reports of troops being injured by the shock reverberation when the shell hits.
Panzershreck22 4 months ago
@NestrMadeinRussia This however, occurs on all tanks. The American tanks have this issue, but don't really like to talk about it. The British have the same issue, and the Germans as well. But the Russian tanks have it the most difficulty. The forces also create much strain on the internal systems, like firing controls or basic electronics. Anyway, in my opinion, I think that the T-90 is on par, or better than the Abrams anyway....
Panzershreck22 4 months ago
@Panzershreck22 Дорогой друг введи google динамическая броня прочитай ...третье поколение этой защиты , защищает от бронебойных подкалиберных фугасных и кумулятивных боеприпасов.Смотрел документальные фильмы про войны где участвовали т-90 ,было много чего , но нигде не было сказано про осколки честное слово ))я тока не понял что ты хотел мне сказать про электронику ?? Она не уступает другим танкам если сравнивать не начальные образцы т-90 а последние модификации...
NestrMadeinRussia 4 months ago
@Panzershreck22 В сравнении т-90 с M1A2 Abrams , т-90 выигрывает во всем! повторяю при последних модификациях, могу скинуть видео но там на русском языке (видео создано не каким нибудь малолеткой это копия документального фильма шедшего по одному из центральных каналов )Плюс т-90 может стрелять ракетами через гладко ствольную пушку и имеет комплекс оптико электронного подавления (эта система уводит ракеты противника в сторону) при стрельбе на расстоянии 5 км имеет почти100%точность
NestrMadeinRussia 4 months ago
@NestrMadeinRussia Quick question, is the dynamic (or reactive armor) completely over the tank or does it just cover specific portions?
Panzershreck22 4 months ago
@Panzershreck22 Почти везде ...
NestrMadeinRussia 4 months ago
@NestrMadeinRussia Interesting...
Panzershreck22 4 months ago
@Panzershreck22
wikipedia - T-90
--
During a reported test conducted by the Russian military in 1999 the T-90 was exposed to a variety of RPG, ATGM and APFSDS munitions. When equipped with Kontakt-5 ERA the T-90 could not be penetrated by any of the APFSDS or ATGM used during the trial and outperformed a T-80U which also took part.[39] During combat operations in Dagestan, there were witness accounts of one T-90 sustaining seven hits from RPGs, and remaining in action
--
dvgsun 3 months ago
@Panzershreck22
NestrMadeinRussia 4 months ago
he M1A2 Abrams is far Superior. The T-80 and 90 are jokes in comparison.
grimlsd420 4 months ago
@grimlsd420 far superior? Hardly. The Abrams may have a superior armor composition, but it's engine systems are it's weakness. It especially has poor fuel ratings in desert operations.
Panzershreck22 4 months ago
T-34/molotov cocktail T-90/hellfire .dasvidania .RIP
jorgos134 5 months ago
A 10-warthog or A 64-Apache ohi problima.Dasvidania for ever!
jorgos134 5 months ago
@jorgos134 - You seem to think Russia is Iraq. xD
bittemeinrammstein 5 months ago 7
@jorgos134 Hahahaha xD ur funny!
MrNaffifire 3 months ago
A challanger 2 would put a round through and out the other side of a T 90 at more than 2km and it has a larger round with supersonic ammunition which is 7x faster than SABOT or HESH
ENGxXsamXxENG 5 months ago
@ENGxXsamXxENG - What? xD 120mm / 125mm... now what round is biggest? 7x faster than APFSDS? Our APFSDS has muzzle velocity of 1,700mps. You are telling me NATO have some round who travel 6,000+mps? LOL your comment is most retarded one I ever saw. xD
bittemeinrammstein 5 months ago 11
@bittemeinrammstein they shoot titanium kinetic energy rounds from the Abrams and is armour is unknown on the table of elements simply because it can take a round a keep on chugin lol with its gas turbine engine haha, one shot is all America ever need hiroshima fuck you nagasaki just cause we can so fuck you commies,you simply say you hate America because you want to be us thats why so many people do its true power has always been oppressed well fuck you, btw look up the moons ours,to bad so sad
The357python 5 months ago
@The357python Are you mentally retarded? No, you're just a typical American cunt who comes in and spews things that he doesn't know or things that make no sense whatsoever. First, the armour on the Abrams is made with a depleted uranium composition. Is Uranium an unknown element? NO. It's element 92 on the periodic table. Second, I don't know why you put anything with Japan or communism because they are completely unrelated to this video. Japan was never communist, and Russia hasn't been for 20y
Panzershreck22 4 months ago
@The357python and finally, no one wants to be like you. 1/3 of the population obese, most of the population is suffering from the economic downfall. You say you are the best country in the world? You've fucked it up more times than any other in your short existence. The one thing which really bothers me about you, is how utterly ignorant you are.
Panzershreck22 4 months ago
@ENGxXsamXxENG
2 kilometers? Wow, that's a nice distance. The problem is, though, that T-90's rounds penetrate enemy tanks armor at up to 5 kilometers (in case of HE rounds, it's up to 10 kilometers). I'l do the math for you, it's 2.5x bigger range for armor piercing rounds and 5x the distance for HE rounds. So your challenger 2 would have been a pile of burning garbage at 2 kilometers in case it met T-90 in a real combat situation.
cantfindawayout 3 months ago
@cantfindawayout the issue is line of sight...
Panzershreck22 2 months ago
And they are all rubbish tanks sorry but its true
ENGxXsamXxENG 5 months ago
what"s the name of the song???
NUCLEARsuperBLAST 5 months ago
The best tanks in the world for that moment are:
Ukrainian T-84 "Oplot", Oplot-M(Modifi T-84 for 2010 year), Yatagan, perspective russian T-90M and T-90SA and german Leopard 2A6. Other tanks SUCKS!
DEMASkinas 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Autoloader sucks.
Slow rate of fire compered to manual loader
Malfunction all the time and no loader to operate and load the coax.
Shorter AP rounds = less penetration
Less crewman.
And i tell you T-90 and T-72 is the most un-ergonomic tanks i ever been in. You cant keep your focus up for long time inside on of those..
vurre222 6 months ago
Okay Plebes, listen up. I've managed all three tanks, so here's a one-time, freebee. Abrams sports reactive side-suite and rear cage protection, alongside vastly superior imaging and communication packages. Additionally, Abe is balanced for future kinetic impact - it, and Chall are battle tested and worthy. The 90 has slop low gears, poor interface (due to corrected), and a dog drive to weight ratio with sizable drift. Finally, the 80 - seriously? Not enough characters her to piont bad!
ejdotw 6 months ago
i do find it very funny lol all theses folks posting bold claims with not a clue as to what they are talking about.............. get out into the real world and maybe you wont look like such a pleb !!!!your little T90 sits about 10th on a normal persons list
gunneruk1983 6 months ago
@gunneruk1983 - Funny... from some guy who provides no evidence to support his claims.
bittemeinrammstein 6 months ago
@bittemeinrammstein what evidence would you like, my 7 as an MBT driver for british army or the video's of me in red flag driving other tanks ???
gunneruk1983 6 months ago
@gunneruk1983 years, 7 years, sorry i missed that before you pick up on it
gunneruk1983 6 months ago
OUTDATED TRASH
wolframixx 6 months ago
@wolframixx newer then abrams >.>
val28l 6 months ago
@val28l SPELLING FAIL!
wolframixx 6 months ago
@wolframixx where at? and it still doesn't change the fact that it's newer then abrams.
val28l 6 months ago
@val28l newer THAN abrams. and technology in the abrams is far superior. hence the t-90 is already outdated =)
wolframixx 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@wolframixx ok, i'll agree with you. just tell me how: "technology in the abrams is far superior. " and why "the t-90 is already outdated =)". i am really just interested in your thoughts and not trying to troll you or anything.
val28l 6 months ago
This on the other hand is a very well done comparison of the worlds top MBT's watch?v=xVdZrzLvsFM&feature=fvwrel
SkullKing11841 7 months ago
There actually not. The T-80 did horribly in the first Chechen war and the T-90 was out preformed by the Indian Arjun in testing and in there own testing the Russian Army penetrated the Frontal amour of a T-90 with an RPG-29 with one round. And in combat the RPG-29 has been fired at M1s and Challengers frontal Armour and has not penetrated.Just be realistic, there both designed of tanks that are now 60 and 40 years old and the Russian military and industry is still suffering from 90's
SkullKing11841 7 months ago
@SkullKing11841 so then indian army quickly proceeded to order 300 t-90 because it was "out preformed by the Indian Arjun in testing"? also, "in combat the RPG-29 has been fired at M1s and Challengers frontal Armour and has not penetrated", 1st, WHERE in combat (as in which combat) were rpg-29 fired @ abrams, and don't tell me iraq war, lol, i'll laugh at you. and and did w/e fired them linded it up to hit the thickest part of the tank's armor only?
val28l 6 months ago
@val28l In 2010 the Indian's did the test of the Arjun against the T-90, Where the Arjun out preformed it, the reason they ordered the 300 T-90s was the Arjun was lagging in production and some problems were coming up. So to fill the numbers the Arjun wasn't going to be able to fill anytime soon they ordered 300 T-90's. The Russian's were the one's who fired a RPG-29 at a T-90's frontal amour in testing and the RPG-29 penetrated it, they admitted it.
SkullKing11841 6 months ago
@val28l Ahh yeah actually in Iraq they have. The Iranian's have RPG-29's which they gave to the Insurgency's in Iraq. There was a Challenger 2 that got it by about 15 RPG-7's and one Milan Anti-tank missile, were the the only damage it sustained was the Gun Sight was knocked out buy the Milan. Look im sure if the Russian's hadn't canceled the T-95, that would have been up there with the best of them. But the T-90 and very much so about the T-80 are not the Best tanks in the world.
SkullKing11841 6 months ago
@SkullKing11841 yeah... iranians just GAVE rpg 29 to iraqis.... lol!!! since iranians are shiites, and iraqi are sunites, who hate each other. don't forget the wars they had. now, i know that iranians hate us, but they like iraqis no more then they like americans. now, do you have a PROOF that insurgency fighters used rpg-29, and not 7? video, photos, anything?
val28l 6 months ago
Part 1 With regards to the Iranians and the Iraqi's. There's a large Shia population in Iraq, it's actually the Major ethic group in Iraq. JAM was a Shia militia that fought MNF-I, AQI, and attacked the Sunni Population during the civil war and the Sunni's did the same and went to AQI for help, and so on you get the whole civil war/ sectarian violence/ethnic cleansing thing that happened. It was well known that JAM and other shia militia's were being supplied by Iran.
SkullKing11841 6 months ago
@SkullKing11841 i will also make a separate post regarding "Challenger 2 that got it by about 15 RPG-7's and one Milan Anti-tank missile", again, do you have proof? videos, pictures, anything. because why stop at 15? in another video, some guy claimed it was 70 (seventy lol!!!) rpg hits that challenger took and lived. now, i know of some t-90s that had taken multiple rpg hits and survived. there are numerous pictures i can provide, that show t-90 tanks after few rpg hits and atgm.
val28l 6 months ago
@SkullKing11841 honestly, i would like to see some pictures, that prove anything that you say. i am not saying that you are wrong, it's just that you make statements, yet you are providing no proof to what you're saying. so, as far as i'm concerned, you're just talking out of your ass without any knowledge of the subject (and i mean it in a nicest way w/o trying to insult you at all).
val28l 6 months ago
@val28l Part 1 With regards to the Iranians and the Iraqi's. There's a large Shia population in Iraq, it's actually the Major ethic group in Iraq. JAM was a Shia militia that fought MNF-I, AQI, and attacked the Sunni Population during the civil war and the Sunni's did the same and went to AQI for help, and so on you get the whole civil war/ sectarian violence/ethnic cleansing thing that happened. It was well known that JAM and other shia militia's were being supplied by Iran.
SkullKing11841 6 months ago
@val28l Part 3 ' LiveLeak.com - RPG-29 vs M1A2 ' ( < google that) That RPG-29 wounded one crew member and ' 20.10.1999 T-80U and T-90 Protection Trials ' (< google that) you can read it all if you want but the summery is down the bottom. You know what as I’ve been searching around. I found that one RPG-29 could knock out a T-90 but if you fired 2 RPG-29s at either an M1 or Chall 2 in the same place, you would defiantly kill it.
SkullKing11841 6 months ago
@val28l Part 4 “The most lopsided achievement of the M1A2s was the destruction of seven T-72 Lion of Babylon tanks in a point-blank skirmish (less than 50 yards (46 m)) near Mahmoudiyah, about 18 miles (29 km) south of Baghdad, with no losses for the American side. “ Heavy Metal: A Tank Company's Battle to Baghdad. I can’t find anything on the Chall vs those RPG-7’s plus one Milan, it was on a TV show. I doubt the RPG-7’s that were fired at the Challenger would even penetrate a T-90.
SkullKing11841 6 months ago
@val28l Part 5 70 “7’s”?? I think 70 is bullshit. How would one tank be hit by 70 and not have pulled out, or at least destroyed the area it was taking hit’s from. 70 would get through a Nimitz class CV lol.
I think the whole point of my original comment/s was that the T-90 – 80 are not the best tanks in the world. I’m not all blindly pro American and thinking that the M1 is like a Wehrmacht MK 6 Tiger against a Soviet T-26 being all other modern day MBT’s.
SkullKing11841 6 months ago
@val28l Part 6 Plus air power matters a little more than having the best tanks, probably the reason Russia cancelled the T-95) If I was a Soldier and in a 3-4 years I will be, and I saw a whole bunch of T-90’s coming towards me, even if we had our own Amour (M1 AIM Australia’s equivalent of the M1A2) I’d still be scared because that 125mm could fuck shit up, plus the M1 is under gunned compared to other tanks. L44 cal gun compared to what is could have, L55 cal like on the Chalenger 2 and Leo 2.
SkullKing11841 6 months ago
@val28l Part 7 If you want to put other info up, that’d be good, I do enjoy reading and learning about this stuff. :) (oh that 3-4 years comment doesn’t mean I’m 14 btw hahaha)
SkullKing11841 6 months ago
@SkullKing11841 ok, that was an excellent rant, i should +1 you for the shear effort. but tbh, i could not at all understand what you are saying. i guess that your point is that t-90 and t-80 are not the best tanks in the world, and you also stated that challenger and abrams aren't as good as everyone says. i think. is that what you're saying? correct me if i'm wrong please. now, for the second part of my post, which tank model do you think is #1 in the world today?
val28l 6 months ago
@val28l Hahaha yeah it was fairly long haha :) Well people seem to get all bias and talk them up to much, if you look at the Chinese T-95 i think it is, on paper it seems match western tanks, i don't know about the electronics, but it surprised me.
Well my Favorite would probably be a PanzerKamfWagen Mark 6 Tiger, but I'd take a Mark 5 Panther to war over it. The best today if i had to choose to save my life, I'd say the German Leopard 2A7 and the U.S has the best tank crew's. :) What's your's?
SkullKing11841 6 months ago
@SkullKing11841 i would go with the latest t-90 or t-80 modifications, probably t-90m, which is almost invincible at this point. i would REALLY like to look into russian armata, but it is not yet out, and not much is known about it, as it is highly secretive.
val28l 6 months ago
@SkullKing11841 Most western countries have better tank crews thanks to simulations where the officers can overwatch the crews preformance. I dont think there is such a think in Russia.
vurre222 6 months ago
@SkullKing11841 "Part 4 “The most lopsided achievement of the M1A2s was the destruction of seven T-72 Lion of Babylon tanks"
Is this really a point you're trying to make? I personally wouldn't compare the crappy Iraqi "T-72", to a Russian one as it has inferior armour (worse the a T-72A), and the Iraqi's used ammo that the soviets phased out in 1973.
Also it doesn't even fire a ATGM.
The t-80 has nothing to do with those "T-72's", and the T-90 has evolved 2 generations.
roknikov 5 months ago
@roknikov Yeah i know i wasnt comparing the Iraqi T-72 to the T-90 (that was not even up to standard of late Soviet models of the T-72)
Dont remember why i used that quote, but it was probaly becasue the other guy was talking about Iraqi T-72's against M1's which is such an unfair fight.
T-90 hasnt evoved 2 generations it's a 4th not 5th, same as M1,Chall 2,Leo 2A6
Video you might like :) /watch?v=7KG0uyt2uYA
SkullKing11841 5 months ago
@SkullKing11841 Well concidering you had the T-72B (uprated sandwich armour, ATGM firing capability) after the T-72A, which followed the T-72's basic design.
The T-80's are IMO a more advanced generation of tanks compared to the T-72 even though they were built at the same time. (Also it's not that easy to compare the Soviet gear to US gear due to the totally different design philosophy, i meant it like "production generations".
roknikov 5 months ago
@roknikov Being built/Upgraded at the same time i would have thought they'd be very simmilar and the T-72 would be like a bigger brother to the T-80 with it's bigger gun and thicker amour. Although i saw a video that said a simmilar thing, didnt explain why but, i may look into it one day.
yeah it was well made, i dont think it was a bias video towards soveit tanks, but it would have been good if he mentioned some draw backs to some of the advantages.
Yeah i have seen the 2nd video to it.
:)
SkullKing11841 5 months ago
@SkullKing11841 I allready saw the vid and it's really well made, however, it thought it was typical there wasn't anything said about the fact that Soviet tanks can't lower their cannons as far as western tanks do.
(which as most people know is because the lower overall height of the Soviet type turrets, which restrict gun movement.)
The second part of the video is also quite informative btw ;)
roknikov 5 months ago
I'd take a T-80 over a T-90 anyday...
TheEvilAmerican 9 months ago
RAP music sucks I refuse to watch trash like this.
Lowracerman 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
:Military experts simulated a showdown between the Russian T-90 tank and the German Leopard 2A6 to verify the claims by some Russian generals that the Russian hardware was inferior to its NATO analogues. Using mathematical models to simulate a battle between the Russian and the German tank, experts concluded that in a real battle the Leopard would not stand a chance of coming within a shooting distance of T-90
Zbyszkoz 10 months ago
Omfg russia ST30NG!
ZephyrWestWind 11 months ago
most western theory about tank design superiority is based on the encounters between 4th generation american and british designs{abrams and challenger} and israeli{merkavas}with well trained crews and air superiority dispatching antiquated T 55 and 60 with poorly trained crews and tactics and also T 72s again poorly led and trained the latest generation of soviet tanks have yet to be met in combat and with vastly improved electronics and night fighting capabilities they may prove equal 2 task.
TheCharlatan74 11 months ago
Че то я не понял, почему написано, что самый большой в мире резервуар??
Самый лучший в Мире танк это да, а причем тут резервуар?
RISSSD17 11 months ago
T-80 and 90 the BEST? I doubt it. The Russians are hardly known for putting out the BEST in military equipment. They have always been QUANTITY over QUALITY. Now I'm sure these tanks are rather capable front line fighters, but they are no match for an Abrams, Leopard, Challenger, or Leclerc.
Put a few in the hands of the Syrians and watch the Izzie Merkavas lay waste to them.
Wooddevil 11 months ago
@Wooddevil
"They have always been QUANTITY over QUALITY."
Have you ever used Russian-Soviet military equipment?
Apparently not.
Sismiques 11 months ago
@Wooddevil what like the T 34 u mean
TheCharlatan74 11 months ago
The best tanks
dmitrlap 11 months ago
Here's the math for you silly reds.
T-90 uses similar BDD armor to the T-72 (except with titanium instead of aluminum) plus an air gap. TE vs KE = .56 ; TE vs HEAT = .79
38cm x .9 + 43.5cm x .56 = 59cm KE
BUT WAIT! Now we have to adjust for the free edge effect: .95 x 59cm or 56cm KE.
I'm adjusting my figures for HEAT because of newer data I found, so 38cm + 43.5cm x 0.79 = 72cm HEAT
With added Kontakt-5: 81cm vs KE and 112 vs CE
JumpingonYubTub 11 months ago
the T 80u was a classic soviet tank, but the russians made a better version
UseUrHead503 1 year ago
Good tank - not more heavy fast and have a good defence. - Good to war .
Leopard Mercava Lecler Abrams Chalenger they good to Tank Salon ore movies )
They not good in desert moving snow or swamps they are 20 sentry tanks )
TheSnowWow 1 year ago
Sorry mister video creator, but the T-90's armor is 550mm RHAe (830mm with Kontakt-5). The T-80 also had 550mm, but it had 780mm with Kontakt-5. The T-80 was put to bed because of the First Chechen War, which proved that had a vulnerable gas-turbine engine.
JumpingonYubTub 1 year ago
@JumpingonYubTub - sorry mr. guy who do know anything on tanks... T-90A armour with no ERA is 900-1,000mm equal to RHA, with ERA he increase to 1,455mm on rough estimate. T-80U armour with ERA 1,100mm~. I serve on T-72B and work at T-80U in army 3 years, kiddo. ;)
bittemeinrammstein 1 year ago
@bittemeinrammstein Thos are the values for Chemical Energy. I was using the values for Kinetic Energy (the most common type of attack used in tank vs tank combat).
JumpingonYubTub 1 year ago
@JumpingonYubTub - Mmmm... nope, Kenetic enegery rounds does not make armour less, kid. xaxa... T-90A still have 1,455mm equal to RHA armour buddy.
bittemeinrammstein 1 year ago
@bittemeinrammstein Nope. The armor on a T-90 (and any modern tank, for that matter) has increased resistance to Chemical Energy versus Kinetic Energy. Here's the model most people agree on:
T-90 vs KE: 550 mm + 280mm with Kontakt-5 = 830mm
T-90 vs KE: vs HEAT: 650 mm + 700mm with Kontakt-5 = 1,350mm
JumpingonYubTub 1 year ago
@JumpingonYubTub - whats most funny is HEAT round usually do more damage than APDSFS KE rounds... for example tests done on T-72B1 in state trials USA where APDSFS round dont penetrate... APDSFS round used on tests was M829A2... so how to explain this? Wikipedia/FAS figures is wrong obviously... real test prove more strong than phantom figures who have no certificate, sorry mate.
bittemeinrammstein 1 year ago
@JumpingonYubTub
The figure of 650mm RHAe vs HEAT projectiles was proven incorrect over 10 years ago, during armour protection trials, T-90 tanks were tested against various AT weapons, during these trials a T-90 without K-5 reactive armour was also tested, it withstood multiple hits from a Kornet ATGM, which has a claimed penetration figure much higher than 650mm RHAe, therefore it is safe to claim that this accepted figure of 650mm RHAe is incorrect.
vtkrey 11 months ago
@vtkrey There's a slight problem there: The Kornet uses a HEAT warhead. The 650mm figure (which is more like 560mm, considering the extreme similarity between the T-90 and T-72) is for Kinetic Energy. HEAT rounds use Chemical Energy. There's a big difference, especially when the average MBT nowadays has a higher resistance to CE than KE (the T-90 included).
JumpingonYubTub 11 months ago